Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2008  with  funding  from 

Microsoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/essayslettersOOtolsrich 


ESSAYS  AND   LETTERS 


ESSAYS    AND 
LETTERS 


BY 


LEO     TOLSTOY 


TRANSLATED    BY 

AYLMER    MAUDE 


UNIVERSITY 


^ 


NEW   YORK 

FUNK    AND   WAGNALLS    COMPANY 

1904 


SCHVrtTION 

■  • 

L  TO  BE 
DETAINED 


:  20 1995 


PRINTED   BY 

BILLINO   AND  SONS,    LIMITED, 

GUILDFORD,    ENGLAND 


A'7 

PREFACE 


The  articles  in  this  volume  of  Essays  and  Letters  all 
belong  to  one  period  of  Tolstoy's  career  (the  years 
1888-1903).  The  subjects  with  which  they  deal  are 
religion  and  moral  duty  :  what  man  should  believe 
and  do,  and  what  he  should  not  believe  and  not  do. 

Some  of  the  letters  are  of  the  nature  of  rough  essays 
or  drafts  of  essays,  but  if  less  carefully  finished  than 
the  longer  essays,  they  have  the  special  merit  of  show- 
ing Tolstoy's  opinions  in  application  to  certain  people 
and  to  certain  definite  conditions.  They  thus  help  to 
bridge  the  gulf  between  theory  and  practice. 

Some  of  the  articles  in  this  book  are  now  published, 
in  English,  for  the  first  time  ;  and  most  of  the  articles 
are  newly  translated.  During  their  preparation  I  have 
had  the  great  advantage  of  receiving  repeated  assist- 
ance from  Lea  Tolstoy,  as  well  as  kind  encouragement. 

Footnotes  that  occur  in  the  original  are  marked 
L.  T.     For  those  not  so  marked  I  am  responsible. 

AYLMER  MAUDE. 
Great  Baddow, 
Chelmsford. 

[T] 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

preface      v 

i.  industry  and  idleness       ....         1 

ii.  why  do  men  stupefy  themselves?     .         .       16 

iii.  an  afterword  to  '  the  kreutzer  sonata  '       36 

iv.  the  first  step   .         .  .  53 

v.  non-acting  ......       94 

vi.*an    afterword    to   an  account  of  relief 

supplied  to  the  famine-stricken    .         .123 
vii.  religion  and  morality      .         .         .         .128 

viii.  Treason  and  religion  .         .         .         .155 

IX.    SHAME  !           . 160 

X.,  XL  ^LETTERS    TO    PETER     VERIGIN,    THE     DOUK- 

HOBOR.  LEADER 167 

XII. ^LETTER  ON  NON-RESISTANCE  :    TO   E.   H.  CROSBY  177 
XIII.  *HOW     TO     READ     THE     GOSPELS,     AND     WHAT     IS 

ESSENTIAL    IN    THEM  .  .  .  .  .189 

XIV.  *A    LETTER    TO    RUSSIAN    LIBERALS     .             .             .  193 

XV.  *TIMOTHY    BONDAREF 210 

[   Vii] 


viii  CONTENTS 

PAGE 
XVI. ^LETTERS   ON    HENRY    GEORGE           .             .             .213 
XVII.    MODERN    SCIENCE            .             .             .             .             .219 
XVIII.  *LETTER    TO    A    NON-COMMISSIONED    OFFICER      .  230 
XIX.*PATRIOTISM    AND    GOVERNMENT       .             .             .  238 
XX. *e  THOU    SHALT    NOT    KILL '       ....  202 
XXI. *TO    THE    TSAR    AND    HIS    ASSISTANTS           .             .  270 
XXII.  *A    REPLY    TO    THE    SYNOD'S    EDICT    OF    EXCOM- 
MUNICATION        277 

XXIII.  *WHAT    IS    RELIGION,    AND    WHEREIN    LIES    ITS 

ESSENCE? 288 

XXIV.  *LETTER    ON    EDUCATION            ....  338 
XXV.  *AN    APPEAL    TO    THE    CLERGY            .             .             .  341 

XXVI.    THOUGHTS   SELECTED  FROM  PRIVATE  LETTERS  I 

TWO    VIEWS    OF    LIFE  ....  365 

MATTER    IS    THE    LIMIT    OF    SPIRIT        .  .  366 

THE    SCAFFOLDING     .....  367 

THE   LIFE    OF    THE    SPIRIT  .  .  .  367 

THE    FEAR    OF    DEATH  ....  368 

THE    WAY    TO    KNOW    GOD    AND    THE    SOUL  .  368 


370 


The  articles  marked  in  the  above  Table  of  Contents  with 
an  asterisk  (*)  are  not  included  in  the  Moscow  editions  of 
Tolstoy's  works ;  being,  for  the  most  part,  prohibited  in 
Russia. 


UNive 


Sa 


ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 


INDUSTRY  AND  IDLENESS 

'  In  the  sweat  of  thy  face  shalt  thou  eat  bread,  till  thou 
return  unto  the  ground  ;  for  out  of  it  wast  thou  taken.' — 
Gen.  iii.  19. 

The  above  are  the  title  and  the  epigraph  of  a  book  by- 
Timothy  Mihaylovitch  Bondaref*  which  I  have  read  in 
manuscript. 

That  book  seems  to  me  very  remarkable  for  its 
strength,  its  clearness,  and  the  beauty  of  its  language, 
as  well  as  for  a  sincerity  of  conviction  that  is  apparent 
in  every  line,  but  above  all  for  the  importance,  truth, 
and  depth  of  its  fundamental  thought. 

*  T.  M.  Bondaref  was  born  a  serf  in  1820.  In  1858  he 
was  sent  to  serve  for  twenty-five  years  in  the  army,  but 
joining  the  sect  of  '  Sabbatarians  '  (who  accept  the  Old 
Testament  as  authoritative,  and  follow  the^Jewish  faith  in 
many  things),  he  was  banished  in  1867  to  Udina  in  Siberia. 
There,  as  a  ploughman  of  great  energy,  he  built  up  for 
himself  a  fairly  comfortable  peasant  home,  but  again  im- 
poverished himself  by  efforts  to  spread  his  doctrine  of 
'bread-labour.'  His  book  could  not  be  published  in  Russia, 
but  has  been  translated  into  French  and  other  languages. 
Another  title  Bondaref  gave  to  his  book  is  'The  Agri- 
culturist's Triumph.' 

A 


2  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

The  fundamental  thought  of  the  book  is  the  follow- 
ing :  Jn  all  the  affairs  of  life  the  important  thing  is  to 
know,  not  what  is  good  and  necessary,  but  what  of  all 
the  good  and  necessary  things  in  existence  comes  first 
in  importance,  what  second,  what  third,  and  so  on. 

If  that  is  important  in  worldly  affairs,  yet  more  is  it 
important  in  matters  of  faith,  which  define  man's  duties. 

Tatian,  a  teacher  of  the  early  Church,  says  that 
men's  sufferings  come  not  so  much  from  their  not 
knowing  God,  as  from  their  acknowledging  a  false  god 
and  esteeming  as  God  that  which  is  not  God.  The 
same  thought  applies  to  the  duties  men  acknowledge. 
Misfortune  and  evil  come,  not  so  much  from  men  not 
knowing  their  duties,  as  from  the  fact  that  they  acknow- 
ledge false  duties  and  esteem  as  duties  things  that  are 
not  really  such,  while  they  do  not  recognise  as  a  duty 
that  which  is  really  their  first  duty.  Bdndaref  declares 
that  the  misfortunes  and  evil  in  men's  lives  come  from 
regarding  many  empty  and  harmful  regulations  as 
religious  duties,  while  forgetting,  and  hiding  from  them- 
selves and  others,  that  chief,  primary,  undoubted  duty 
announced  at  the  beginning  of  the  Holy  Scriptures : 
c  In  the  sweat  of  thy  face  shalt  thou  eat  bread.' 

For  those  who  believe  in  the  sanctity  and  infallibility 
of  the  word  of  God  as  expressed  in  the  Bible,  the 
command  there  given  by  God  Himself,  and  nowhere 
revoked,  is  sufficient  proof  of  its  own  validity.  But 
for  those  who  do  not  acknowledge  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
the  importance  and  validity  of  this  commandment  (if 
only  it  be  considered  without  prejudice  as  a  simple,  not 
supernatural,  expression  of  human  wisdom)  may  be 
>roved  by  a  consideration  of  the  conditions  of  human 
ife,  as  is  done  by  Bdndaref  in  his  book. 

An  obstacle  to  such  consideration  unfortunately 
exists  in  the  fact  that  many  of  us  are  so  accustomed  to 
hear  from  theologians  perverted  and  senseless  inter- 
pretations of  the  words  of  Holy  Scripture,  that  the 
mere  reminder  that  a  certain  principle  coincides  with 
the  teachings  of  Scripture,  is  enough  to  cause  some 
people  to  distrust  that  principle. 


I 


INDUSTRY  A  lsTD  IDLENESS  3 

c  What  do  I  care  for  the  Holy  Scriptures  ?  We  know 
that  anything  you  like  can  be  deduced  from  them,  and 
that  they  are  all  rubbish.' 

But  this  is  unreasonable.  Surely  the  Holy  Scriptures 
are  not  to  blame  because  people  interpret  them  falsely  ; 
and  a  man  who  says  what  is  true,  is  not  to  blame 
because  the  truth  he  utters  is  contained  in  the  Holy 
Scriptures. 

One  must  not  forget  that,  if  it  be  granted  that  what 
are  called  the  Scriptures  are  human  productions,  it  has 
still  to  be  explained  why  just  these  human  writings,  and 
not  some  others,  have  come  to  be  regarded  by  men 
as  the  words  of  God  Himself.  There  must  be  some 
reason  for  it. 

And  the  reason  is  clear. 

Superstitious  people  called  the  Scriptures  Divine 
because  they  were  superior  to  anything  else  that 
people  knew  ;  and  that  is  also  the  reason  why  these 
Scriptures,  though  always  rejected  by  some  men,  have 
survived  and  are  still  considered  Divine.  These  Scrip- 
tures are  called  Divine  and  have  come  down  to  us 
because  they  contain  the  highest  human  wisdom.  And, 
in  many  of  its  parts,  such  is  really  the  character  of  the 
Scriptures  called  the  Bible. 

And  such,  among  these  Scriptures,  is  that  forgotten, 
neglected,  and  misunderstood  saying  which  Bondaref 
has  explained  and  set  at  the  head  of  the  corner. 

That  saying,  and  the  whole  story  of  Paradise,  are 
commonly  taken  in  a  literal  sense,  as  though  every- 
thing actually  happened  as  described  ;  whereas  the 
meaning  of  the  whole  narrative  is,  that  it  figuratively 
represents  the  conflicting  tendencies  which  exist  in 
human  nature. 

Man  fears  death,  but  is  subject  to  it.  Man  seems 
happier  while  ignorant  of  good  and  evil,  yet  strives 
irresistibly  to  reach  that  knowledge.  Man  loves  idle- 
ness, and  wishes  to  satisfy  his  desires  without  suffering, 
yet  only  by  labour  and  suffering  can  he  or  his  race 
have  life. 

The  sentence   Bondaref    quotes   is   important,    not 

a  2 


4  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

because  it  is  supposed  to  have  been  said  by  God  to 
Adam,  but  because  it  is  true ;  it  states  one  of  the 
indubitable  laws  of  human  life.  The  law  of  gravity  is 
not  true  because  it  was  stated  by  Newton  ;  but  I  know 
of  Newton,  and  am  grateful  to  him,  because  he  showed 
an  eternal  law  which  explains  to  me  a  whole  series  of 
facts. 

It  is  the  same  with  the  law:  e  In  the  sweat  of  thy  face 
shalt  thou  eat  bread.'  That  is  a  law  which  explains  to 
me  a  whole  series  of  facts.  And  having  once  known  it, 
I  cannot  forget  it,  and  am  grateful  to  him  who  revealed 
it  to  me. 

This  law  seems  very  simple  and  familiar,  but 
that  is  only  apparently  so  ;  and  to  convince  one's  self 
of  that  fact  we  need  only  look  around  us.  Not 
only  do  people  not  acknowledge  this  law,  but  they 
acknowledge  the  very  reverse  of  it.  People's  belief 
leads  them  (from  King  to  beggar)  to  strive,  not  to  fulfil 
that  law  but  to  avoid  fulfilling  it.  Bondaref 's  book  is 
devoted  to  explaining  the  permanence  and  immutability 
of  that  law,  and  the  inevitable  sufferings  that  flow  from 
its  neglect. 

Bondaref  calls  that  law  the  c  first-born '  and  chief  of 
all  laws. 

Bondaref  demonstrates  that  sins — i.e.,  mistakes,  false 
actions — result  solely  from  the  violation  of  this  law. 
Of  all  the  definite  duties  of  man,  Bondaref  considers 
that  the  chief,  primary,  and  most  immutable  for 
every  man,  is  to  earn  his  bread  with  his  own  hands, 
understanding  by  bread-labour  all  heavy  rough  work 
necessary  to  save  man  from  death  by  hunger  and  cold, 
and  by  (  bread '  food,  drink,  clothes,  shelter,  and  fuel. 

Bondaref  s  fundamental  thought  is  that  this  law — 
that  to  live  man  must  work — heretofore  acknowledged 
as  inevitable,  should  be  acknowledged  as  being  a  benefi- 
cent law  of  life,  obligatory  on  everyone. 

This  law  should  be  acknowledged  as  a  religious  law, 
like  keeping  the  Sabbath  or  being  circumcised  among  the 
Jews,  like  receiving  the  Sacrament  or  failing  among 
Church  Christians,  like  praying  five  times  a  day  among 


INDUSTRY  AND  IDLENESS  5 

the  Mohammedans.  Bondaref  says,  in  one  place,  that  if 
people  but  recognised  bread-labour  as  a  religious  obliga- 
tion, no  private  or  special  occupations  could  prevent 
their  doing  it,  any  more  than  special  occupations 
prevent  Church-people  from  keeping  their  holidays. 
There  are  about  eighty  holidays  in  the  year,*  but  to 
perform  *  bread  -labour,'  according  to  Bondaref 's  cal- 
culation, only  forty  days  are  needed. 

However  strange  it  may  seem  at  first  that  such  a 
simple  method,  intelligible  to  everyone,  and  involving 
nothing  cunning  or  profound,  can  save  humanity  from 
its  innumerable  ills,  yet  more  strange,  when  one  comes 
to  think  of  it,  must  it  seem  that  we,  having  at  hand 
so  clear,  simple,  and  long  familiar  a  method,  can, 
while  neglecting  it,  seek  a  cure  for  our  ills  in  various 
subtleties  and  profundities.  Yet  consider  the  matter 
well  and  you  will  see  that  such  is  the  case. 

A  man  omitting  to  fix  a  bottom  to  his  tub,  and  then 
devising  all  sorts  of  cunning  means  to  keep  the  water 
from  running  away,  would  typify  all  our  efforts  to  heal 
existing  ills. 

Indeed,  from  what  do  all  the  ills  of  life  arise,  if  we 
except  those  that  people  cause  to  one  another  directly, 
by  murders,  executions,  imprisonments,  fights,  and  the 
many  cruelties  in  which  men  sin  by  using  violence  ? 
All  the  ills  of  humanity— except  those  produced  by 
direct  violence — come  from  hunger,  from  want  of  all 
kinds,  from  being  overworked,  or,  on  the  other  hand, 
from  excess  and  idleness,  and  the  vices  they  produce. 
What  more  sacred  duty  can  man  have  than  to  co- 
operate in  the  destruction  of  this  inequality — this  want, 
on  the  one  hand,  and  this  temptation  of  riches  on  the 
other?  And  how  can  man  co-operate  in  the  destruction 
of  these  evils  but  by  taking  part  in  work  which  supplies 
human  needs,  and  by  liberating  himself  from  super- 
fluities and  idleness  productive  of  temptations  and  vices 

*  Saints'  days  are  numerous  in  Russia,  but  on  the  other 
hand,  no  Saturday  or  other  weekly  half-holiday  is  customary, 
so  that  the  total  time  allowed  for  holidays  comes  to  much 
the  same  in  Russia  as  in  England. 


6  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

— how,  that  is,  but  by  each  man  doing  bread-labour 
to  feed  himself  with  his  own  hands,  as  Bdndaref  ex- 
presses it  ? 

We  have  become  so  entangled,  have  involved  our- 
selves in  so  many  laws — religious,  social,  and  family — 
have  accepted  so  many  precepts — as  Isaiah  says,  precept 
upon  precept,  here  a  precept  and  there  a  precept — that 
we  have  completely  lost  the  perception  of  what  is  good 
and  what  is  bad. 

One  man  performs  Mass,  another  collects  an  army  or 
the  taxes  to  pay  for  it,  a  third  acts  as  judge,  a  fourth 
studies  books,  a  fifth  heals  people,  a  sixth  instructs 
them,  and  freeing  themselves  from  bread-labour  under 
these  pretexts,  they  thrust  it  on  to  others,  and  forget 
that  men  are  dying  of  exhaustion,  labour,  and  hunger  ; 
and  that,  in  order  that  there  may  be  people  to  sing 
Mass  to,  to  defend  with  an  army,  to  judge,  to  doctor, 
or  to  instruct,  it  is  necessary,  first  of  all,  that  they 
should  not  die  of  hunger.  We  forget  that  there  may 
be  many  duties,  but  that  among  them  all  there  is  a 
first  and  a  last,  and  that  one  must  not  fulfil  the  last 
before  fulfilling  the  first,  just  as  one  must  not  harrow 
before  ploughing. 

And  it  is  to  this  first,  undoubted  duty  in  the  sphere  of 
practical  activity,  that  Bdndarefs  teaching  brings  us 
back.  Bdndaref  shows  that  the  performance  of  this 
duty  hinders  nothing  and  presents  no  obstacles,  yet 
saves  men  from  the  misery  of  want  and  temptation 
Above  all,  the  performance  of  this  duty  would  destroy 
that  terrible  separation  of  mankind  into  two  classes 
which  hate  each  other  and  hide  their  mutual  hatred  by 
cajolery.  Bread-labour,  says  Bdndaref,  equalizes  all 
and  clips  the  wings  of  luxury  and  lust. 

One  cannot  plough  or  dig  wells  dressed  in  fine 
clothes,  with  clean  hands,  and  nourishing  one's  self 
on  delicate  food.  Work  at  one  sacred  occupation, 
common  to  all,  will  draw  men  together.  Bread-labour, 
Bdndaref  says,  will  restore  reason  to  those  who  have 
lost  it  by  standing  aside  from  the  life  natural  to  man, 
and  will  give  happiness  and  content  to  those  engaged 


INDUSTRY  AND  IDLENESS  7 

in  work  undoubtedly  useful,  and  appointed  by  God 
Himself  and  by  the  laws  of  Nature. 

Bread-labour,  says  Bondaref,  is  a  medicine  to  save 
mankind.  If  men  acknowledged  this  first-born  law  as 
an  unalterable  law  of  God — if  each  one  admitted  bread- 
labour  (to  feed  himself  by  the  work  of  his  own  hands) 
to  be  his  inexorable  duty — all  men  would  unite  in  belief 
in  one  God  and  in  love  one  to  another,  and  the  suffer- 
ings which  now  weigh  us  down  would  be  destroyed. 

We  are  so  accustomed  to  a  way  of  life  which  assumes 
the  opposite  of  this — namely,  assumes  that  riches  (means 
to  avoid  bread-labour)  represent  either  a  blessing  from 
God  or  a  higher  social  status — that,  without  analysing 
Bondaref  s  proposition,  we  wish  to  consider  it  narrow, 
one-sided,  empty,  and  stupid.  But  we  must  examine 
his  position  carefully,  and  consider  whether  it  be  just 
or  not. 

We  weigh  all  kinds  of  religious  and  political  theories. 
Let  us  weigh  Bondarefs  also  as  a  theory.  Let  us  con- 
sider what  the  result  will  be  if,  in  accord  with  his 
thought,  the  influence  of  religious  teaching  is  directed 
to  the  elucidation  of  this  commandment,  and  all  men 
are  brought  to  admit  this  sacred,  first-born  law  of 
labour. 

All  will  then  work,  and  eat  the  fruit  of  their  own 
labours.  Corn  and  articles  of  primary  necessity  will 
cease  to  be  objects  of  purchase  or  sale. 

What  will  be  the  result  ? 

The  result  will  be  that  men  will  not  perish  from  want. 
If  from  unfortunate  circumstances  one  man  fails  to  grow 
enough  food  for  himself  and  his  family,  someone  else, 
who  from  fortunate  circumstances  has  grown  too  much, 
will  supply  the  lack  ;  and  will  do  so  the  more  readily 
because  there  is  no  other  use  for  his  corn,  it  being  no 
longer  an  article  of  commerce.  Then  men  will  not  be 
tempted  by  want  to  get  their  bread  by  cunning  or  by 
violence.  And  not  being  so  tempted,  they  will  not  use 
cunning  or  violence  ;  the  need  that  now  compels  them 
will  no  longer  exist. 

If  a  man  then  still  uses  cunning  or  violence,  it  will 


8  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

be  because  be  loves  such  ways,  and  not  because  they 
are  necessary  to  him — as  at  present. 

Nor  will  it  be  necessary  for  the  weak — those  who, 
for  some  reason,  are  unable  to  earn  their  bread,  or  who 
have  lost  it  in  any  way — to  sell  themselves,  their  labour, 
or  sometimes  even  their  souls,  for  bread. 

There  will  not  be  the  present  general  striving  to  free 
one's  self  from  bread-labour  and  to  put  it  on  to  others 
— a  striving  to  crush  the  weak  with  overwork  and  to  free 
the  strong  from  all  work.  | 

There  will  not  be  that  tendency  which  now  directs 
the  greatest  efforts  of  men's  minds,  not  towards  lighten- 
ing the  labour  of  the  workers,  but  towards  lightening 
and  embellishing  the  idleness  of  the  idlers.  The 
participation  of  all  in  bread-labour,  and  its  recognition 
as  first  among  human  affairs,  will  accomplish  what 
would  be  achieved  by  taking  a  cart,  which  stupid 
people  were  hauling  along  upside  down,  and  turning  it 
over  on  to  its  wheels.  The  cart  would  be  saved  from 
breaking,  and  would  move  easily. 

And  our  life,  with  its  contempt  for,  and  rejection  of, 
bread-labour,  and  our  attempts  at  reforming  that  false 
life,  are  like  a  cart  drawn  along  with  its  wheels  in  the 
air.  All  our  reforms  are  useless  till  we  turn  the  cart 
over  and  stand  it  right  way  up. 

Such  is  Bondaref's  thought,  with  which  I  fully 
agree.  The  matter  presents  itself  to  me  again  as 
follows.  There  was  a  time  when  people  ate  one  another. 
The  consciousness  of  unity  among  men  developed  until 
that  became  impossible,  and  they  ceased  to  eat  each 
other.  Then  came  a  time  when  people  seized  the 
fruits  of  labour  by  violence  from  their  fellows,  and 
made  slaves  of  men.  But  consciousness  developed  till 
that  also  became  impossible.  Violence,  though  still 
practised  in  hidden  ways,  has  been  destroyed  in  its 
grosser  forms :  men  no  longer  openly  seize  the  fruits 
of  one  another's  labour.  In  our  day  the  form  of 
violence  practised  is,  that  some  people  take  advantage 
of  the  needs  of  others  to  exploit  them  In  B unlareFs 
opinion  the  time  is  near  when  there  will  be  such  a 


INDUSTRY  AND  IDLENESS  9 

perception  of  human  unity  that  men  will  feel  it 
impossible  to  take  advantage  of  the  need,  the  hunger, 
and  the  cold  of  others  to  exploit  them  ;  and  when  men, 
acknowledging  the  law  of  bread-labour  as  binding  on 
everyone,  will  recognise  it  as  their  bounden  duty, 
without  selling  articles  of  prime  necessity,  to  feed, 
clothe,  and  warm  one  another  in  case  of  need. 

Approaching  the  matter  from  another  side,  I  look  at 
this  problem  of  Brindaref  s  thus  :  We  often  hear  reflec- 
tions on  the  insufficiency  of  merely  negative  laws  or 
commandments — i.e.,  of  rules  telling  us  what  not  to  do. 
People  say,  We  need  positive  laws  or  commandments — 
rules  telling  us  what  to  do.  The  five  commandments 
of  Christ — (1)  to  consider  no  one  insignificant  or  in- 
sane, and  to  be  angry  with  no  one  ;  (2)  not  to  consider 
sexual  intercourse  as  a  matter  of  pleasure,  nor  to  leave 
the  wife  or  husband  with  whom  one  has  once  united ; 
(3)  to  take  no  oaths  to  anyone,  and  not  to  give  away 
one's  freedom  ;  (4)  to  endure  injuries  and  violence,  and 
not  to  resist  them  by  violence  ;  and  (5)  to  consider  no 
man  an  enemy,  but  to  love  enemies  as  friends — it  is 
said  that  these  five  commandments  of  Christ's  all  tell 
only  what  should  not  be  done,  but  that  there  are  no 
commandments  or  laws  telling  what  should  be  done. 

And,  indeed,  it  may  seem  strange  that  in  Christ's 
teaching  there  are  no  equally  definite  commandments 
telling  us  what  we  ought  to  do.  But  this  seems 
strange  only  to  those  who  do  not  believe  Christ's  real 
teaching,  which  is  contained,  not  in  five  commandments, 
but  in  the  teaching  of  truth  itself. 

The  teaching  of  truth  expressed  by  Christ  is  not  con- 
tained in  laws  and  commandments,  but  in  one  thing 
only — the  meaning  given  to  life.  And  that  meaning  is, 
that  life  and  the  blessing  of  life  are  not  to  be  found  in 
personal  happiness,  as  people  generally  suppose,  but  in 
the  service  of  God  and  man.  And  this  is  not  a  command 
which  must  be  obeyed  to  gain  a  reward,  nor  is  it  a 
mystical  expression  of  something  mysterious  and  unin- 
telligible, but  it  is  the  elucidation  of  a  law  of  life  previ- 
ously concealed  ;   it  is  the  indication  of  the  fact  that 


10  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

life  can  be  a  blessing  only  when  this  truth  is  understood. 
And,  therefore,  the  whole  positive  teaching  of  Christ  is 
expressed  in  this  one  thing  :  Love  God,  and  thy  neigh- 
bour as  thyself.  And  no  expositions  of  that  precept 
are  possible.  It  is  one,  because  it  contains  all.  The 
law  and  commandments  of  Christ,  like  the  Jewish  and 
Buddhist  laws  and  commandments,  are  but  indications 
of  cases  in  which  the  snares  of  the  world  turn  men 
aside  from  a  true  understanding  of  life.  And  that  is 
why  there  may  be  many  laws  and  many  commandments, 
but  the  positive  teaching  of  life — of  what  should  be 
done — must  and  can  be  only  one. 

The  life  of  each  man  is  a  movement  somewhere  : 
whether  he  will  or  not,  he  moves,  he  lives.  Christ 
shows  man  the  road,  and  at  the  same  time  indicates  the 
paths  leading  from  the  right  road — paths  which  lead 
astray.  Of  such  indications  there  may  be  many — they 
are  the  commandments. 

Christ  gives  five  such  commandments,  and  those  He 
gave  are  such  that  up  to  the  present  not  one  can  with 
advantage  be  added  or  spared.  But  only  one  direction 
showing  the  road  is  given,  for  there  can  be  but  one 
straight  line  showing  a  certain  direction. 

Therefore  the  idea  that  in  Christ's  teaching  there  are 
only  negative  commands  and  no  positive  ones  seems 
true  only  to  those  who  do  not  know,  or  do  not  believe, 
in  the  teaching  of  truth  itself— the  direction  of  the  true 
path  of  life  indicated  by  Christ.  Believers  in  the  truth 
of  the  path  of  life  shown  by  Jesus  will  not  seek  for 
positive  commandments  in  His  teaching.  All  positive 
activity  flowing  from  the  teaching  of  the  true  path  of 
life — most  diverse  as  that  activity  may  be — is  always 
clearly  and  indubitably  defined  for  them. 

Believers  in  that  path  of  life  are,  In  Christ's  simile, 
like  an  abundant  spring  of  living  water.  All  their 
activity  is  like  the  course  of  water,  which  flows  every- 
where regardless  of  obstacles.  A  man  believing  in  the 
teaching  of  Christ  can  as  little  ask  what  positive  com- 
mands he  is  to  obey  as  a  stream  of  water,  bursting  from 
the  ground,  could  ask  the  question.     It  flows,  watering 


INDUSTRY  AND  IDLENESS  11 

the  earth,  grass,  trees,  birds,  animals,  and  men.  And 
a  man  who  believes  Christ's  teaching  of  life  does 
likewise. 

A  believer  in  the  teaching  of  Jesus  will  not  ask  what 
he  is  to  do.  Love,  which  becomes  the  motive-force  of 
his  life,  will  surely  and  inevitably  show  him  where  to 
act,  and  what  to  do  first  and  what  afterwards. 

Not  to  speak  of  indications  Christ's  teaching  is  full 
of,  showing  that  the  first  and  most  necessary  activity  of 
love  is  to  feed  the  hungry,  give  drink  to  the  thirsty, 
clothe  the  naked,  and  help  the  poor  and  the  prisoners, 
— our  reason,  conscience,  and  feelings  all  impel  us 
(before  undertaking  any  other  service  of  love  to  living 
men)  first  to  sustain  life  in  our  brethren  by  saving  them 
from  sufferings  and  death  that  threaten  them  in  their 
too  arduous  struggles  with  Nature.  That  is  to  say,  we 
are  called  on  to  share  the  labour  needful  for  the  life  of 
man — the  primary,  rough,  heavy  labour  on  the  land. 

As  a  spring  cannot  question  where  its  waters  are  to 
flow — upwards,  splashing  the  grass  and  the  leaves  of 
the  trees,  or  downwards  to  the  roots  of  the  grass  and 
trees — so  a  believer  in  the  teaching  of  truth  cannot  ask 
what  he  must  do  first — whether  to  teach  people,  defend 
them,  amuse  them,  supply  them  with  the  pleasures  of 
life,  or  save  them  from  perishing  of  want.  And  just  as 
water  from  a  spring  flows  along  the  surface  and  fills 
ponds  and  gives  drink  to  animals  and  men,  only  after  it 
has  soaked  the  ground,  so  a  believer  in  the  teaching  of 
truth  can  serve  less  urgent  human  demands  only  after 
he  has  satisfied  the  primary  demand  :  has  helped  to  feed 
men,  and  to  save  them  from  perishing  in  their  struggle 
against  want.  A  man  following  the  teaching  of  truth 
and  love,  not  in  words  but  in  deeds,  cannot  mistake 
where  first  to  direct  his  efforts.  A  man  who  sees  the 
meaning  of  his  life  in  service  to  others  can  never  make 
such  a  blunder  as  to  begin  to  serve  hungry  and  naked 
humanity  by  forging  cannon,  manufacturing  elegant 
ornaments,  or  playing  the  violin  or  the  piano. 

Love  cannot  be  stupid. 

As  love  for  one  man  would  not  let  us  read  novels  to 


12  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

him  who  was  starving,  or  hang-  costly  earrings  on  him 
who  was  naked,  so  love  for  mankind  will  not  let  us 
serve  it  by  amusing  the  well-fed  while  we  leave  the  cold 
and  hungry  to  die  of  want. 

True  love,  love  not  merely  in  words  hut  in  deeds, 
cannot  be  stupid— it  is  the  one  thing  giving  true  per- 
ception and  wisdom. 

And,  therefore,  a  man  penetrated  by  love  will  not 
make  a  mistake,  but  will  be  sure  to  do  first  what  love 
of  man  first  requires  :  he  will  do  what  maintains  the 
life  of  the  hungry,  the  cold,  and  the  heavy-laden,  and 
that  is  all  done  by  a  direct  struggle  with  Nature. 

Only  he  who  wishes  to  deceive  himself  and  others, 
can,  while  men  are  in  danger,  struggling  against  want, 
stand  aside  from  helping  them,  and,  while  he  adds  to 
their  burden,  assure  himself  and  those  who  perish 
before  his  eyes,  that  he  is  occupied,  or  is  devising 
means  to  save  them. 

No  sincere  man  who  sees  that  the  purpose  of  his  life 
is  to  serve  others  will  say  that.  Or  if  he  says  it,  he 
will'  find  in  his  conscience  no  confirmation  of  his  de- 
lusion, but  will  have  to  seek  it  in  the  insidious  doctrine 
of  the  division  of  labour.  In  all  expressions  of  tru« 
human  wisdom,  from  Confucius  to  Mohammed,  he  will 
find  one  and  the  same  truth  (and  will  find  it  most 
forcibly  in  the  Gospels) — a  summons  to  serve  man  not 
according  to  the  theory  of  the  division  of  labour,  but 
in  the  simplest,  most  natural,  and  only  necessary  way  : 
he  will  find  a  demand  to  serve  the  sick,  the  prisoners, 
the  hungry,  and  the  naked.  And  help  to  the  sick,  the 
prisoners,  the  hungry,  and  the  naked,  can  be  rendered 
only  by  one's  own  immediate  direct  labour — for  the 
sick,  hungry,  and  naked  do  not  wait,  but  die  of  hunger 
and  cold. 

His  own  life,  which  consists  of  service  to  others, 
will  guide  a  man  confessing  the  teaching  of  truth,  to 
that  primary  law  expressed  at  the  commencement  of 
Genesis,  '  In  the  sweat  of  thy  face  shalt  thou  eat 
bread/  which  liondaref  calls "' first-born  '  and  puts 
forward  as  a  positive  command. 


INDUSTRY  AND  IDLENESS  13 

And  positive  that  law  really  is,  for  those  who  do  not 
acknowledge  the  meaning  of  life  which  Christ  disclosed. 
Such  it  was  for  men  before  Christ,  and  such  it  remains 
for  those  who  do  not  acknowledge  Christ's  teaching.  It 
demands  that  everyone  should — according  to  the  law  of 
God  expressed  in  the  Bible  and  in  our  reason — feed 
himself  by  his  own  labour.  That  law  was  positive,  and 
such  it  remains  till  the  meaning  of  life  is  revealed  to 
man  by  the  teaching  of  truth. 

But  from  the  plane  of  the  higher  consciousness  of 
life  disclosed  by  Christ,  the  law  of  bread-labour,  remain- 
ing true  as  before,  fits  into  Christ's  one  positive  teach- 
ing of  service  to  man  ;  and  must  be  regarded  no  longer 
as  positive,  but  as  negative.  That  law,  from  the  Chris- 
tian point  of  view,  merely  indicates  an  ancient  snare, 
and  tells  men  what  they  should  avoid  in  order  not  to 
stray  from  the  path  of  true  life. 

For  a  follower  of  the  Old  Testament  who  does  not 
acknowledge  this  teaching  of  truth,  this  law  means : 
( Produce  thy  bread  by  the  labour  of  thine  own  hands/ 
But  for  a  Christian  its  meaning  is  negative.  To  him 
this  law  says  :  '  Do  not  suppose  it  possible  to  serve  men 
while  you  consume  what  others  labour  to  produce,  and 
do  not  produce  your  own  maintenance  with  your  own 
hands.' 

This  law,  for  a  Christian,  is  an  indication  of  one  of 
the  most  ancient  and  terrible  of  the  temptations  from 
which  mankind  suffers.  Against  that  temptation 
(terrible  in  its  consequences,  and  so  old  that  it  is  hard 
for  us  to  admit  that  it  is  not  a  natural  characteristic  of 
man,  but  a  deception)  this  teaching  of  Bdndaref  is 
directed — a  teaching  equally  obligatory  on  a  believer 
in  the  Old  Testament,  on  a  Christian  who  believes  in 
the  Gospels,  and  on  him  who  disbelieves  in  the  Bible 
and  follows  only  common-sense. 

There  is  much  I  could  and  would  write  to  prove  the 
truth  of  this  position  and  overthrow  the  various  and 
complex  arguments  against  it  which  rise  to  the  lips  of 
us  all ;  we  know  we  are  to  blame,  and  are  therefore 
always  ready  with  justifications.      But  however  much  I 


14  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

may  write,  however  well  I  may  write,  and  however 
logically  exact  I  may  be,  I  shall  not  convince  my 
reader,  so  long  as  his  intellect  is  pitted  against  mine 
and  his  heart  remains  cold. 

And  that  is  why  I  ask  you,  reader,  to  check  for 
awhile  the  activity  of  your  intellect,  and  not  to  argue 
nor  to  demonstrate,  but  to  ask  only  your  heart.  Who- 
ever you  may  be,  however  gifted,  however  kind  to  those 
about  you,  however  circumstanced,  can  you  sit  un- 
moved over  your  tea,  your  dinner,  your  political, 
artistic,  scientific,  medical,  or  educational  affairs,  while 
you  hear  or  see  at  your  door  a  hungry,  cold,  sick, 
suffering  man?  No.  Yet  they  are  always  there,  If 
not  at  the  door,  then  ten  yards  or  ten  miles  away. 
They  are  there,  and  you  know  it. 

And  you  cannot  be  at  peace — cannot  have  pleasure 
which  is  not  poisoned  by  this  knowledge.  Not  to  see 
them  at  your  door  you  have  to  fence  them  off,  or  keep 
them  away  by  your  coldness,  or  go  somewhere  where 
they  rare  not.     But  they  are  everywhere. 

And  if  a  place  be  found  where  you  cannot  see  them, 
still,  you  can  nowhere  escape  from  the  truth.  What, 
then,  must  be  done  ? 

You  know  these  things,  and  the  teaching  of  truth 
tells  you  them. 

Go  to  the  bottom — to  what  seems  to  you  the  bottom, 
but  is  really  the  top — take  your  place  beside  those  who 
produce  food  for  the  hungry  and  clothes  for  the  naked, 
and  do  not  be  afraid :  it  will  not  be  worse,  but  better 
in  all  respects.  Take  your  place  in  the  ranks,  set  to 
work  with  your  weak,  unskilled  hands  at  that  primary 
work  which  feeds  the  hungry  and  clothes  the  naked  : 
at  bread-labour,  the  struggle  with  Nature  ;  and  you 
will  feel,  for  the  first  time,  firm  ground  beneath  your 
feet,  will  feel  that  you  are  at  home,  that  you  are  free 
and  stand  firmly,  and  have  reached  the  end  of  your 
journey.  And  you  will  feel  those  complete,  unpoisoned 
joys  which  can  be  found  nowhere  else — not  secured  by 
any  doors  nor  screened  by  any  curtains. 

You  will  know  joys  you  have  never  known  before  ; 


INDUSTRY  AND  IDLENESS  15 

you  will,  for  the  first  time,  know  those  strong,  plain 
men,  your  brothers,  who  from  a  distance  have  fed  you 
until  now ;  and  to  your  surprise  you  will  find  in  them 
such  qualities  as  you  have  never  known  :  such  modesty, 
such  kindness  to  yourself  as  you  will  feel  you  have  not 
deserved. 

Instead  of  the  contempt  or  scorn  you  expected,  you 
will  meet  with  such  kindness,  such  gratitude  and 
respect  for  having — after  living  on  them  and  despising 
them  all  your  life — at  last  recollected  yourself,  and  with 
unskilled  hands  tried  to  help  them. 

You  will  see  that  what  seemed  to  you  like  an  island 
on  which  you  were  saved  from  the  sea  that  threatened 
to  engulf  you,  was  a  marsh  in  which  you  were  sinking  ; 
and  the  sea  you  feared,  was  dry  land  on  which  you  will 
walk  firmly,  quietly,  and  happily  ;  as  must  be  the  case, 
for  from  a  deception  (into  which  you  did  not  enter  of 
your  own  wish,  but  into  which  you  were  led)  you  will 
escape  to  the  truth,  and  from  the  evasion  of  God's 
purpose  you  will  pass  to  its  performance. 

[1888.] 


? 


II 

WHY  DO  MEN  STUPEFY  THEMSELVES? 


What  is  the  explanation  of  the  fact  that  people  use 
things  that  stupefy  them :  vodka,  wine,  beer,  hashish, 
opium,  tobacco,  and  other  things  less  common  :  ether, 
morphia,  fly-agaric,  etc.  ?  Why  did  the  practice  begin? 
Why  has  it  spread  so  rapidly,  and  why  is  it  still  spread- 
ing among  all  sorts  of  people,  savage  and  civilized? 
How  is  that  where  there  is  no  vodka,  wine  or  beer, 
there  we  find  opium,  hashish,  fly-agaric,  etc.,  and  that 
tobacco  is  used  everywhere? 

Why  do  people  wish  to  stupefy  themselves  ? 

Ask  anyone  why  he  began  drinking  wine  and  why  he 
now  drinks  it.  He  will  reply,  '  Oh,  it's  pleasant,  and 
everybody  drinks/  and  he  may  add,  ' it  cheers  me  up/ 
Some — those  who  have  never  once  taken  the  trouble 
to  consider  whether  they  do  well  or  ill  to  drink  wine — 
may  add  that  wine  is  good  for  the  health  and  adds  to 
one's  strength  ;  that  is  to  say,  will  make  a  statement 
long  since  proved  baseless. 

Ask  a  smoker  why  he  began  to  use  tobacco  and  why 
he  now  smokes,  and  he  also  will  reply :  '  To  while 
away  time  ;  everybody  smokes/ 

Similar  answers  would  probably  be  given  by  those 
who  use  opium,  hashish,  morphia,  or  flyagaric. 

'To  while  away  time,  to  be  cheerful;  everybody 
does  it/  But  it  might  be  excusable  to  twiddle  one's 
thumbs,  to  whistle,  to  hum  tunes,  to  play  a  fife  or  to 
do  something  of  that  sort  'to  while  away  time/  'to 
be  cheerful,'  or  '  because  everybody  does  it ' — that  is 
to  say,  it  might  be  excusable  to  do  something  for  which 
[  16  ] 


WHY  DO  MEN  STUPEFY  THEMSELVES?    17 

one  need  not  waste  Nature's  wealth,  nor  spend  what 
has  cost  great  labour  to  produce,  nor  do  what  brings 
evident  harm  to  one's  self  and  to  others.  But  to  produce 
tobacco,  wine,  hashish,  and  opium,  the  labour  of 
millions  of  men  is  spent,  and  millions  and  millions 
of  acres  of  the  best  land  (often  amid  a  population  that 
is  short  of  land)  are  employed  to  grow  potatoes,  hemp, 
poppies,  vines,  and  tobacco.  Moreover,  the  use  of 
these  evidently  harmful  things  produces  terrible  evils 
known  and  admitted  by  everyone,  and  destroys  more 
people  than  all  wars  and  contagious  diseases  added 
together.  And  people  know  this,  so  that  it  cannot  be 
that  they  use  these  things  { to  while  away  time,'  '  to  be 
cheerful,'  or  because  ( everybody  does  it.' 

There  must  be  some  other  reason.  Continually  and 
everywhere  one  meets  people  who  love  their  children 
and  are  ready  to  make  all  kinds  of  sacrifices  for  them, 
but  who  yet  spend  on  vodka,  wine  and  beer,  or  on 
opium,  hashish,  and  even  on  tobacco,  as  much  as  would 
quite  suffice  to  feed  their  hungry  and  poverty-stricken 
children,  or  at  least  as  much  as  would  suffice  to  save 
them  from  misery.  Evidently,  if  a  man  who  has  to 
choose  between  the  want  and  sufferings  of  a  family  he 
loves,  on  the  one  hand,  and  abstinence  from  stupefying 
things  on  the  other,  chooses  the  former — he  must  be 
induced  thereto  by  something  more  potent  than  the 
consideration  that  '  everybody  does  it/  or  that  it  is 
pleasant.  Evidently  it  is  done  not  'to  while  away 
time,'  nor  merely  '  to  be  cheerful,'  but  he  is  actuated 
by  some  more  .powerful  cause. 

*  This  cause — as  far  as  I  have  detected  it  by  reading 
about  this  subject  and  by  observing  other  people,  and 
particularly  by  observing  my  own  case  when  I  used  to 
drink  wine  and  smoke  tobacco — this  cause,  I  think, 
may  be  explained  as  follows  : 

When  observing  his  own  life,  a  man  may  often  notice 
in  himself  two  different  beings  :  the  one  is  blind  and 
physical,  the  other  sees  and  is  spiritual.  The  blind 
animal  being  eats,  drinks,  rests,  sleeps,  propagates, 
and  moves,  like  a  wound-up   machine.     The   seeing, 

B 


18  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

spiritual  being  that  is  bound  up  with  the  animal  does 
nothing  of  itself,  but  only  appraises  the  activity  of  the 
animal  being  ;  coinciding  with  it  when  approving  its 
activity,  and  diverging  from  it  when  disapproving. 

This  observing  being  may  be  compared  to  the  arrow 
of  a  compass,  pointing  with  one  end  to  the  north  and 
with  the  other  to  the  south,  but  screened  along  its 
whole  length  by  something  not  noticeable  so  long  as 
it  and  the  arrow  both  point  the  same  way ;  but  which 
becomes  obvious  as  soon  as  they  point  different  ways. 

In  the  same  manner  the  seeing,  spiritual  being, 
whose  manifestation  we  commonly  call  conscience, 
always  points  with  one  end  towards  right  and  with  the 
other  towards  wrong,  and  we  do  not  notice  it  while  we 
follow  the  course  it  shows :  the  course  from  wrong  to 
right.  But  one  need  only  do  something  contrary  to 
the  indication  of  conscience,  to  become  aware  of  this 
spiritual  being,  which  then  shows  how  the  animal 
activity  has  diverged  from  the  direction  indicated  by 
conscience.  And  as  a  navigator,  conscious  that  lie  is 
on  the  wrong  track,  cannot  continue  to  work  the  oars, 
engine,  or  sails,  till  he  has  adjusted  his  course  to  the 
indications  of  the  compass,  or  has  obliterated  his  con- 
sciousness of  this  divergence — each  man  who  has  felt 
the  duality  of  his  animal  activity  and  his  conscience, 
can  continue  his  activity  only  by  adjusting  that  activity 
to  the  demands  of  conscience,  or  by  hiding  from  himself 
the  indications  conscience  gives  him  of  the  wrongness 
of  his  animal  life. 

All  human  life,  we  may  say,  consists  solely  of  these 
two  activities  :  (1)  bringing  one's  activities  into  harmony 
witli  conscience,  or  (2)  hiding  from  one's  self  the  indica- 
tions of  conscience  in  order  to  be  able  to  continue  to 
live  as  before. 

Some  do  the  first,  others  the  second.  To  attain  the 
first  there  is  but  one  means  :  moral  enlightenment — 
the  increase  of  light  in  one's  self  and  attention  to  what 
it  si  lows  ;  for  the  second — to  hide  from  one's  self  the 
indications  of  conscience — there  are  two  moans  :  one 
external  and  the  other  internal.     The  external  means 


WHY  DO  MEN  STUPEFY  THEMSELVES?    19 

consists  in  occupations  that  divert  one's  attention  from 
the  indications  given  by  conscience ;  the  internal 
method  consists  in  darkening  conscience  itself. 

As  a  man  has  two  ways  of  avoiding  seeing  an  object 
that  is  before  him  :  either  by  diverting  his  sight  to 
other,  more  striking  objects,  or  by  obstructing  the 
sight  of  his  own  eyes — just  so  a  man  can  hide  from  him- 
self the  indications  of  conscience  in  two  ways :  either 
by  the  external  method  of  diverting  his  attention  to 
various  occupations,  cares,  amusements,  or  games ; 
or  by  the  internal  method  of  obstructing  the  organ 
of  attention  itself.  For  people  of  dull,  limited  moral 
feeling,  the  external  diversions  are  often  quite  suf- 
ficient to  enable  them  not  to  perceive  the  indications 
conscience  gives  of  the  wrongness  of  their  lives.  But 
for  morally  sensitive  people  those  means  are  often 
insufficient. 

The  external  means  do  not  quite  divert  attention 
from  the  consciousness  of  discord  between  one's  life 
and  the  demands  of  conscience.  This  consciousness 
hampers  one's  life  :  and  people,  in  order  to  be  able  to 
go  on  living  as  before,  have  recourse  to  the  reliable,  in- 
ternal method,  which  is  that  of  darkening  conscience 
itself  by  poisoning  the  brain  with  stupefying  substances. 

One  is  not  living  as  conscience  demands,  yet  lacks 
the  strength  to  reshape  one's  life  in  accord  with  its 
demands.  The  diversions  which  might  distract  atten- 
tion from  the  consciousness  of  this  discord  are  insuffi- 
cient, or  have  become  stale,  and  so — in  order  to  be  able 
to  live  on,  disregarding  the  indications  conscience 
gives  of  the  wrongness  of  their  life — people  (by  poison- 
ing it  temporarily)  stop  the  activity  of  the  organ 
through  which  conscience  manifests  itself,  as  a  man  by 
covering  his  eyes  hides  from  himself  what  he  does  not 
wish  to  see. 

ii. 

Not  in  the  taste,  nor  in  any  pleasure,  recreation,  or 
mirth  they  afford,  lies  the  cause  of  the  world-wide  con- 
sumption of  hashish,  opium,   wine,   and   tobacco,  but 

b  2 


20  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

simply  in  man's  need  to  hide  from  himself  the  demands 
of  conscience. 

1  was  going  along  the  street  one  day,  and  passing 
some  cabmen  who  were  talking,  I  heard  one  of  them 
say :  '  Of  course,  when  one's  sober,  one's  ashamed  to 
do  it  P 

When  one's  sober  one  is  ashamed  of  what  seems  all 
right  when  one  is  drunk.  In  these  words  we  have  the 
essential  underlying  cause,  prompting  men  to  resort 
to  stupefiers.  People  resort  to  them,  either  to  escape 
feeling  ashamed  after  having  done  something  contrary 
to  their  consciences,  or  to  bring  themselves,  beforehand, 
into  a  state  in  which  they  can  commit  actions  contrary 
to  conscience,  but  to  which  their  animal  nature  prompts 
them. 

A  man  when  sober  is  ashamed  to  go  after  a  prosti- 
tute, ashamed  to  steal,  ashamed  to  kill.  Of  none  of 
these  things  is  a  drunken  man  ashamed,  and  therefore 
if  a  man  wishes  to  do  something  his  conscience  con- 
demns—he stupefies  himself. 

I  remember  being  struck  by  the  evidence  of  a  man 
cook  who  was  tried  for  murdering  a  relation  of  mine,  an 
old  lady  in  whose  service  he  lived.  He  related  that 
when  he  had  sent  away  his  paramour,  the  servant-girl, 
and  the  time  had  come  to  act,  he  wished  to  go  into  the 
bedroom  with  a  knife,  but  felt  that  while  sober  he 
could  not  commit  the  deed  he  had  planned  .  .  . 
'  when  one's  sober  one's  ashamed.'  He  turned  back, 
drank  two  tumblers  of  vodka  he  had  prepared  before- 
hand, and  only  then  felt  himself  ready,  and  committed 
the  crime. 

Nine-tenths  of  the  crimes  are  committed  in  that  way  : 
1 Drink  to  keep  up  your  courage.' 

Half  the  women  who  fall  do  so  under  the  influence 
of  wine.  Nearly  all  visits  to  disorderly  houses  are  paid 
by  men  who  are  intoxicated.  People  know  this  capacity 
of  wine  to  stifle  the  voice  of  conscience,  and  intention- 
ally use  it  for  that  purpose. 

Not  only  do  people  stupefy  themselves  to  stifle  their 
own  consciences,  but  (knowing  how  wine  acts)  when 


WHY  DO  MEN  STUPEFY  THEMSELVES?    21 

they  wish  to  make  others  commit  actions  contrary  to 
conscience,  they  intentionally  stupefy  them — that  is, 
arrange  to  stupefy  people  in  order  to  deprive  them  of 
conscience.  In  war,  soldiers  are  usually  intoxicated 
before  a  hand-to-hand  fight.  All  the  French  soldiers 
in  the  assaults  on  Sevastopol  were  drunk. 

When  a  fortified  place  has  l>een  captured,  but  the 
soldiers  do  not  sack  it  and  slay  the  defenceless  old  men 
and  children,  orders  are  often  given  to  make  them 
drunk,  and  then  they  do  what  is  expected  of  them.* 

Every  one  knows  people  who  have  taken  to  drink  in 
consequence  of  some  wrong-doing  that  has  tormented 
their  conscience.  Any  one  can  notice  that  those  who 
lead  immoral  lives  are  more  attracted,  than  others  by 
stupefying  substances.  Bands  of  robbers  or  thieves, 
and  prostitutes,  cannot  live  without  intoxicants. 

Every  one  knows  and  admits  that  the  use  of  stupefying 
substances  is  a  consequence  of  the  pangs  of  conscience, 
and  that  in  certain  immoral  ways  of  life  stupefying 
substances  are  employed  to  stifle  conscience.  Every 
one  knows  and  admits  also  that  the  use  of  stupefiers 
does  stifle  conscience :  that  a  drunken  man  is  capable 
of  deeds  of  which  when  sober  he  would  not  think  for 
a  moment.  Every  one  agrees  to  this,  but,  strange  to 
say,  when  the  use  of  stupefiers  does  not  result  in  such 
deeds  as  thefts,  murders,  violations  and  so  forth — 
when  stupefiers  are  taken  not  after  some  terrible 
crimes,  but  by  men  following  professions  which  we  do 
not  consider  criminal,  and  when  the  substances  are 
consumed  not  in  large  quantities  at  once  but  con- 
tinually in  moderate  doses — then  (for  some  reason)  it 
is  assumed  that  stupefying  substances  have  no  tendency 
to  stifle  conscience. 

Thus,  it  is  supposed  that  a  well-to-do  Russian's  glass 
of  vodka  before  each  meal,  and  tumbler  of  wine  with 
the  meal ;  or  a  Frenchman's  absinthe  ;  or  an  English- 
man's port  wine  and  porter  ;  or  a  German's  lager-beer  ; 

*  See  the  allusion  to  Skobelef  s  conduct  at  Geok-Tepe  in 
a  preface  by  Tolstoy,  given  in  Grant  Richards'  sixpenny 
edition  of  '  Sevastopol  and  other  Stories.' 


22  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

or  a  well-to-do  Chinaman's  moderate  dose  of  opium  ; 
and  the  smoking  of  tobacco  with  them — is  done  only  for 
pleasure,  and  has  no  effect  whatever  on  these  people's 
consciences. 

It  is  supposed  that  if  after  this  customary  stupefac- 
tion no  crime  is  committed :  nor  theft,  nor  murder, 
but  only  customary  bad  and  stupid  actions — then  these 
actions  have  occurred  of  themselves  and  are  not  evoked 
by  the  stupefaction.  It  is  supposed  that  if  these  people 
have  not  committed  offences  against  the  criminal  law, 
they  have  no  need  to  stifle  the  voice  of  conscience,  and 
that  the  life  led  by  people  who  habitually  stupefy 
themselves  is  quite  a  good  life,  and  would  be  precisely 
the  same  if  they  did  not  stupefy  themselves.  It  is 
supposed  that  the  constant  use  of  stupefiers  does  not 
in  the  least  darken  their  consciences. 

Though  everybody  knows  by  experience  that  one's 
frame  of  mind  is  altered  by  the  use  of  wine  or  tobacco, 
that  one  is  not  ashamed  of  things  which  but  for  the 
stimulant  one  would  be  ashamed  of,  that  after  each 
twinge  of  conscience,  however  slight,  one  is  inclined 
to  have  recourse  to  some  stupefier,  and  that  under  the 
influence  of  stupefiers  it  is  difficult  to  reflect  on  one's 
life  and  position,  and  that  the  constant  and  regular 
use  of  stupefiers  produces  the  same  physiological  effect 
as  its  occasional  immoderate  use  does — yet,  in  spite 
of  all  this,  it  seems  to  men  who  drink  and  smoke 
moderately,  that  they  use  stupefiers  not  at  all  to  stifle 
conscience,  but  only  for  the  flavour  or  for  pleasure. 

But  one  need  only  think  of  the  matter  seriously  and 
impartially — not  trying  to  excuse  one's  self — to  under- 
stand, first,  that  if  the  use  of  stupefiers  in  large 
occasional  doses  stifles  man's  conscience,  their  regular 
use  must  have  a  like  effect  (always  first  intensifying 
and  then  dulling  the  activity  of  the  brain)  whether 
they  are  taken  in  large  or  small  doses.  Secondly,  that 
all  stupefiers  have  the  quality  of  stifling  conscience, 
and  have  this  always — both  when  under  their  influence 
murders,  robberies,  and  violations  are  committed,  and 
when  under  their  influence  words  are  spoken  which 


WHY  DO  MEN  STUPEFY  THEMSELVES?    23 

would  not  have  been  spoken,  or  things  are  thought  and 
felt  which  would  not  have  been  thought  and  felt  but 
for  them  ;  and,  thirdly,  that  if  the  use  of  stupefiers  is 
needed  to  pacify  and  stifle  the  consciences  of  thieves, 
robbers,  and  prostitutes,  it  is  also  wanted  by  people 
engaged  in  occupations  condemned  by  their  own  con- 
sciences, even  though  these  occupations  may  by  other 
people  be  considered  proper  and  honourable. 

In  a  word,  it  is  impossible  to  avoid  understanding 
that  the  use  of  stupefiers,  in  large  or  small  amounts, 
occasionally  or  regularly,  in  the  higher  or  lower  circles 
of  society,  is  evoked  by  one  and  the  same  cause,  the 
need  to  stifle  the  voice  of  conscience  in  order  not  to 
be  aware  of  the  discord  existing  between  one's  way  of 
life  and  the  demands  of  one's  conscience. 


In  that  alone  lies  the  reason  of  the  widespread  use 
of  all  stupefying  substances,  and  among  the  rest  of 
tobacco — probably  the  most  generally  used  and  most 
harmful. 

It  is  supposed  that  tobacco  cheers  one  up,  clears  the 
thoughts,  and  attracts  one  merely  like  any  other  habit 
— without  at  all  producing  the  deadening  of  con- 
science produced  by  wine.  But  you  need  only  observe 
attentively  the  conditions  under  which  a  special  desire 
to  smoke  arises,  and  you  will  be  convinced  that  stupefy- 
ing with  tobacco  acts  on  the  conscience  as  wine  does, 
and  that  people  consciously  have  recourse  to  this 
method  of  stupefaction  just  when  they  require  it  for 
that  purpose.  If  tobacco  merely  cleared  the  thoughts 
and  cheered  one  up,  there  would  not  be  such  a  pas- 
sionate craving  for  it,  a  craving  showfrig  itself  just  on 
certain  definite  occasions.  People  would  not  say  that 
they  would  rather  go  without  bread  than  without 
tobacco,  and  would  not  often  actually  prefer  tobacco  to 
food. 

That  man  cook  who  murdered  his  mistress,  said 
that  when  he  entered  the  bedroom  and  had  gashed  her 


24  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

throat  with  his  knife,  and  she  had  fallen  with  a  rattle 
in  her  throat  and  the  blood  had  gushed  out  in  a 
torrent — he  lost  his  courage.  '  I  could  not  finish  her 
off/  he  said,  'but  I  went  back  from  the  bedroom  to 
the  sitting-room,  and  there  sat  down  and  smoked  a 
cigarette/  Only  after  stupefying  himself  with  tobacco 
was  he  able  to  return  to  the  bedroom,  finish  cutting 
the  old  lady's  throat,  and  begin  examining  her  things. 

Evidently  the  desire  to  smoke  at  that  moment  was 
evoked  in  him,  not  by  a  wish  to  clear  his  thoughts,  or 
be  merry,  but  by  the  need  to  stifle  something  that 
prevented  him  from  completing  what  he  had  planned 
to  do. 

Any  smoker  may  detect  in  himself  the  same  definite 
desire  to  stupefy  himself  with  tobacco  at  certain, 
specially  difficult,  moments.  I  look  back  at  the  days 
when  I  used  to  smoke  :  when  was  it  that  I  felt  a  special 
need  of  tobacco?  It  was  always  at  moments  when  I 
did  not  wish  to  remember  certain  things  that  presented 
themselves  to  my  recollection,  when  I  wished  to  forget 
— not  to  think.  I  sit  by  myself  doing  nothing  and 
know  I  ought  to  set  to  work,  but  don't  feel  inclined 
to,  so  I  smoke  and  go  on  sitting.  I  have  promised 
to  be  at  some  one's  house  by  five  o'clock,  but  I  have 
stayed  too  long  somewhere  else ;  I  remember  that  I 
have  missed  the  appointment,  but  I  do  not  like  to 
remember  it,  so  I  smoke.  I  get  vexed,  and  say  un- 
pleasant things  to  some  one,  and  know  J  am  doing 
wrong,  and  see  that  I  ought  to  stop,  but  I  want  to 
give  vent  to  my  irritability — so  I  smoke  and  continue 
to  be  irritable.  I  play  at  cards  and  lose  more  than 
I  intended  to  risk — so  I  smoke.  I  have  placed  myself 
in  an  awkward  position,  have  acted  badly,  have  made 
a  mistake,  and  ought  to  acknowledge  the  mess  1  am 
in  and  thus  escape  from  it,  but  I  do  not  like  to 
acknowledge  it,  so  I  accuse  others — and  smoke.  I 
write  something  and  am  not  quite  satisfied  frith  nliat 
1  have  written.  I  ought  to  abandon  it,  but  I  wish  to 
finish  what  I  have  planned  to  do — so  I  smoke.  I 
dispute,  and  see  that  my  opponent  and  I  do  not  under- 


WHY  DO  MEN  STUPEFY  THEMSELVES?    25 

stand,  and  cannot  understand,  one  another,  but  I 
wish  to  express  my  opinion,  so  I  continue  to  talk — and 
I  smoke. 

What  distinguishes  tobacco  from  most  other  stupe- 
fiers,  besides  the  ease  with  which  one  can  stupefy 
one's  self  with  it,  and  its  apparent  harmlessness,  is  its 
portability  and  the  possibility  of  applying  it  to  meet 
small,  isolated  occurrences  that  disturb  one.  Not  to 
mention  that  the  use  of  opium,  wine,  and  hashish,  in- 
volves the  use  of  certain  appliances  not  always  at  hand, 
while  one  can  always  carry  tobacco  and  paper  with  one  ; 
and  that  the  opium-smoker  and  the  drunkard  evoke 
horror,  while  a  tobacco-smoker  does  not  seem  at  all 
repulsive — the  advantage  of  tobacco  over  other  stupe- 
fiers  is,  that  the  stupefaction  of  opium,  hashish,  or 
wine,  extends  to  all  the  sensations  and  acts  received 
or  produced  during  a  certain  somewhat  extended  period 
of  time — while  the  stupefaction  from  tobacco  can  be 
directed  to  any  separate  occurrence.  You  wish  to  do 
what  you  ought  not  to,  so  you  smoke  a  cigarette  and 
stupefy  yourself  sufficiently  to  enable  you  to  do  what 
should  not  be  done,  and  then  you  are  again  fresh,  and 
can  think  and  speak  clearly  ;  or  you  feel  you  have 
done  what  you  should  not — again  you  smoke  a  cigarette 
and  the  unpleasant  consciousness  of  the  wrong  or 
awkward  action  is  obliterated,  and  you  can  occupy 
yourself  with  other  things  and  forget  it. 

But  apart  from  individual  cases  in  which  every 
smoker  has  recourse  to  smoking,  not  to  satisfy  a  habit 
or  while  away  time,  but  as  a  means  of  stifling  his  con- 
science with  reference  to  acts  he  is  about  to  commit  or 
has  already  committed,  is  it  not  quite  evident  that 
there  is  a  strict  and  definite  relation  between  men's 
way  of  life  and  their  passion  for  smoking  ? 

When  do  lads  begin  to  smoke  ?  Usually,  when  they 
lose  their  childish  innocence.  How  is  it  that  smokers 
can  abandon  smoking  when  they  come  among  more 
moral  conditions  of  life,  and  again  start  smoking  as 
soon  as  they  fall  among  a  depraved  set?  Why  do 
gamblers  almost  all  smoke?     Why  among  women  do 


26  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

those  who  lead  a  regular  life  smoke  least?  Why  do 
prostitutes  and  madmen  all  smoke  ?  Habit  is  habit ; 
but  evidently  smoking  stands  in  some  definite  con- 
nection with  the  craving  to  stifle  conscience,  and 
achieves  the  end  required  of  it. 

One  may  observe  in  the  case  of  almost  every  smoker 
to  what  an  extent  smoking  drowns  the  voice  of  con- 
science. Every  smoker  when  yielding  to  his  desire 
forgets,  or  sets  at  naught,  the  very  first  demands  of 
social  life — demands  he  expects  others  to  observe,  and 
which  he  observes  in  all  other  cases  until  his  con- 
science is  stifled  by  tobacco.  Every  one  of  average 
education  considers  it  inadmissible,  ill-bred,  and  in- 
humane to  infringe  the  peace,  comfort,  and  yet  more 
the  health,  of  others  for  his  own  pleasure.  No  one 
would  allow  himself  to  wet  a  room  in  which  people  are 
sitting,  or  to  make  a  noise,  shout,  let  in  cold,  hot,  or 
ill-smelling  air,  or  commit  acts  that  incommode  or 
harm  others.  But  out  of  a  thousand  smokers  not  one 
will  shrink  from  producing  unwholesome  smoke  in  a 
room  where  the  air  is  breathed  by  non-smoking  women 
and  children. 

If  smokers  do  usually  say  to  those  present :  ■  You 
don't  object?'  every  one  knows  that  the  customary 
answer  is  :  'Not  at  all'  (although  it  cannot  be  pleasant 
to  a  non-smoker  to  breathe  tainted  air,  and  to  find 
stinking  cigar-ends  in  glasses  and  cups  or  on  plates 
and  candlesticks,  or  even  in  ash  pans).*  But  even  if 
non-smoking  adults  did  not  object  to  tobacco-smoke,  it 
could  not  be  pleasant  or  good  for  the  children  whose 
consent  no  one  asks.  Yet  people  who  are  honourable 
and  humane  in  all  other  respects,  smoke  in  the  presence 
of  children  at  dinner  in  small  rooms,  vitiating  the  air 
with  tobacco-smoke,  without  feeling  the  slightest  twinge 
of  conscience. 

It  is  usually  said  (and  I  used  to  say)  that  smoking 

*  In  the  matters  alluded  to,  the  Russian  customs  are 
worse  than  the  English,  partly,  perhaps,  because  in  Russia, 
owing  to  a  drier  climate,  the  smell  of  stale  tobacco  in  the 
rooms  is  less  offensive  than  in  England. 


WHY  DO  MEN  STUPEFY  THEMSELVES?    27 

facilitates  mental  work.  And  that  is  undoubtedly  true 
if  one  considers  only  the  quantity  of  one's  mental  out- 
put. To  a  man  who  smokes,  and  who  consequently 
ceases  strictly  to  appraise  and  weigh  his  thoughts,  it 
seems  as  if  he  suddenly  had  many  thoughts.  But  this 
is  not  because  he  really  has  many  thoughts,  but  only 
because  he  has  lost  control  of  his  thoughts. 

When  a  man  works,  he  is  always  conscious  of  two 
beings  in  himself:  the  one  works,  the  other  appraises 
the  work.  The  stricter  the  appraisement,  the  slower 
and  the  better  is  the  work  ;  and  vice  versa,  when  the 
appraiser  is  under  the  influence  of  something  that 
stupefies  him,  more  work  gets  done,  but  its  quality  is 
lower. 

1  If  I  do  not  smoke  I  cannot  write.  I  cannot  get 
on ;  I  begin  and  cannot  continue/  is  what  is  usually 
said,  and  what  I  used  to  say.  What  does  it  really 
mean  ?  It  means  either  that  you  have  nothing  to  write, 
or  that  what  you  wish  to  write  has  not  yet  matured  in 
your  consciousness,  but  is  only  beginning  dimly  to 
present  itself  to  you,  and  the  appraising  critic  within, 
when  not  stupefied  with  tobacco,  tells  you  so.  If  you 
did  not  smoke  you  would  either  abandon  what  you  have 
begun,  or  you  would  wait  until  your  thought  has  cleared 
itself  in  your  mind  ;  you  would  try  to  penetrate  into 
what  presents  itself  dimly  to  you,  would  consider 
the  objections  that  offer  themselves,  and  would  turn  all 
your  attention  to  the  elucidation  of  the  thought.  But 
you  smoke,  the  critic  within  you  is  stupefied,  and  the 
hindrance  to  your  work  is  removed.  What  to  you 
when  not  inebriated  by  tobacco  seemed  insignificant, 
again  seems  important ;  what  seemed  obscure,  no 
longer  seems  so  ;  the  objections  that  presented  them- 
selves vanish,  and  you  continue  to  write,  and  write 
much  and  rapidly. 


But  can  such  a  small — such  a  trifling — alteration  as 
the  slight  intoxication  produced  by  the  moderate  use 
of  wine  or  tobacco  produce   important  consequences  ? 


28  ESSAYS  AND  LE1TERS 

{lf  a  man  smokes  opium  or  hashish,  or  intoxicates 
himself  with  wine  till  he  falls  down  and  loses  his  senses, 
of  course  the  consequences  may  be  very  serious  ;  but 
for  a  man  merely  to  come  slightly  under  the  influence 
of  hops  or  tobacco,  surely  cannot  have  any  serious 
consequences,'  is  what  is  usually  said.  It  seems  to 
people  that  a  slight  stupefaction,  a  little  darkening  of 
the  judgment,  cannot  have  any  important  influence. 
But  to  think  so,  is  as  if  one  supposed  that  it  may  harm 
a  watch  to  be  struck  against  a  stone,  but  that  a  little 
dirt  introduced  into  it  cannot  do  it  any  harm. 

Remember,  however,  that  the  chief  work  actuating 
man's  whole  life  is  not  work  done  by  his  hands,  feet,  or 
back,  but  by  his  consciousness.  For  a  man  to  do  any- 
thing with  feet  or  hands,  a  certain  alteration  has  first 
to  take  place  in  his  consciousness.  And  this  altera- 
tion defines  all  the  subsequent  movements  of  the  man. 
Yet  these  alterations  are  always  minute  and  almost 
imperceptible. 

Brulof*  one  day  corrected  a  pupil's  study.  The 
pupil,  having  glanced  at  the  altered  drawing,  exclaimed  : 
(  Wh^,  you  only  touched  it  a  tiny  bit,  but  it  is  quite 
another  thing.'  Brulof  replied:  e  Art  begins  where 
the  tiny  bit  begins/ 

That  saying  is  strikingly  true,  not  of  art  alone,  but 
of  all  life.  One  may  say  that  true  life  begins  where 
the  tiny  bit  begins — where  what  seem  to  us  minute  and 
infinitely  small  alterations  take  place.  True  life  is  not 
lived  where  great  external  changes  take  place — where 
people  move  about,  clash,  fight,  and  slay  one  another — 
but  it  is  lived  only  where  these  tiny,  tiny,  infinitesimally 
small  changes  occur. 

llaskolnikoff  lived  his  true  life,  not  when  he  mur- 
dered the  old  woman  or  her  sister.  When  murdering 
the  old  woman  herself,  and  especially  when  murdering 
her  sister,  he  did  not  live  his  true  life,  but  acted  like  a 
machine,  doing  what  he  could   not   help   doing — dis- 

*  K.  P.  Brulof,  a  celebrated  Russian  painter  (1799-1S52). 
f  The  hero  of  Dostoyefsky's  novel,  '  Crime  and  Punish- 
ment.' 


IN  STUPEFY  THEMSELVES?    29 

charging  the  cartridge  with  which  he  had  long  been 
loaded.  One  old  woman  was  killed,  another  stood 
before  him,  the  axe  was  in  his  hand. 

Raskdlnikof  lived  his  true  life,  not  when  he  met  the 
old  woman's  sister,  but  at  the  time  when  he  had  not 
vet  killed  any  old  woman,  nor  entered  a  stranger's 
lodging  with  intent  to  kill,  nor  held  the  axe  in  his 
hand,  nor  had  the  loop  in  his  overcoat  by  which  the 
axe  hung — at  the  time  when  he  was  lying  on  the  sofa  in 
his  room,  deliberating  not  at  all  about  the  old  woman, 
nor  even  as  to  whether  it  is,  or  is  not,  permissible  at  the 
will  of  one  man  to  wipe  from  the  face  of  the  earth 
another,  unnecessary  and  harmful,  man,  but  was  de- 
liberating whether  he  ought  to  live  in  Petersburg  or 
not,  whether  he  ought  to  accept  money  from  his  mother 
or  not,  and  on  other  questions  not  at  all  relating  to  the 
old  woman.  And  then — in  that  region  quite  inde- 
pendent of  animal  activities — the  question  whether  he 
would  or  would  not  kill  the  old  woman  was  decided. 
That  question  was  decided — not  when  he,  having  killed 
one  old  woman,  stood  before  another,  axe  in  hand — but 
when  he  was  doing  nothing  and  was  only  thinking  : 
when  only  his  consciousness  was  active,  and  in  that 
consciousness  tiny,  tiny  alterations  were  taking  place. 
It  is  at  such  times  that  one  needs  the  greatest  clearness 
to  decide  correctly  the  questions  that  have  arisen,  and 
it  is  just  then  that  one  glass  of  beer,  or  one  cigarette, 
may  prevent  the  solution  of  the  question,  may  postpone 
the  decision,  stifle  the  voice  of  conscience,  prompt  a 
decision  of  the'  question  in  favour  of  one's  lower, 
animal  nature — as  was  the  case  with  Raskdlnikof. 

Tiny,  tiny  alterations — but  on  them  depend  the  most 
immense,  the  most  terrible  consequences.  From  what 
happens  when  a  man  has  taken  a  decision  and  begun  to 
act,  many  material  changes  may  result :  houses,  riches, 
and  people's  bodies  may  perish,  but  nothing  more  im- 
portant can  happen  than  what  was  hidden  in  the  man's 
consciousness.  The  limits  of  what  can  happen  are  set 
by  consciousness. 

But  from  most  minute  alterations  occurring  in  the 


30  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

domain  of  consciousness,  boundless  results  of  unimagin- 
able importance  may  follow. 

Do  not  let  it  be  supposed  tbat  what  I  am  saying  has 
anything  to  do  with  the  question  of  free-will  or  deter- 
minism. Discussion  on  that  question  is  superfluous  for 
my  purpose,  or  for  any  other  for  that  matter.  Without 
deciding  the  question  whether  a  man  can,  or  cannot, 
act  as  he  wishes  to  (a  question,  in  my  opinion,  not  cor- 
rectly stated),  I  am  merely  saying  that  since  human 
activity  is  conditioned  by  infinitesimal  alterations  in 
consciousness,  it  follows  (no  matter  whether  we  admit, 
or  do  not  admit,  the  existence  of  free-will)  that  we 
must  pay  particular  attention  to  the  condition  in  which 
these  minute  alterations  take  place,  just  as  one  must 
be  specially  attentive  to  the  condition  of  scales  on  which 
other  things  are  to  be  weighed.  We  must,  as  far  as  it  de- 
pends on  us,  try  to  put  ourselves  and  others  in  condi- 
tions which  will  not  disturb  the  clearness  and  delicacy 
of  thought  necessary  for  the  correct  working  of  con- 
science, and  must  not  act  in  the  contrary  manner  :  try- 
ing to  hinder  and  confuse  the  work  of  conscience  by  the 
use  of  stupefying  substances. 

For  man  is  a  spiritual  as  well  as  an  animal  being. 
Man  may  be  moved  by  things  that  influence  his  spiritual 
nature,  or  may  be  moved  by  things  that  influence  his 
animal  nature,  as  a  clock  may  be  moved  by  its  hands 
or  by  its  main  wheel.  And  just  as  it  is  best  to  regulate 
the  movement  of  a  clock  by  means  of  its  inner  mechan- 
ism, so  a  man — one's  self  or  another — is  best  regulated 
by  means  of  his  consciousness.  And  as  with  a  clock 
one  has  to  take  special  care  of  the  thing  by  means  of 
which  one  can  best  move  the  inner  mechanism,  so  with 
a  man,  one  must  attend  most  of  all  to  the  clean  inl- 
and clearness  of  consciousness  ;  consciousness  being 
the  thing  that  best  moves  the  whole  man.  To  doubt 
this  is  impossible  ;  every  one  knows  it.  Uut  a  need  to 
deceive  one's  self  arises.  People  are  not  as  anxious  that 
consciousness  should  work  correctly,  as  they  are  that  it 
should  seem  to  them  that  what  they  are  doin^  is  right, 
and  they  knowingly  make  use  of  substances  that  disturb 
the  proper  working  of  their  consciousness. 


WHY  DO  MEN  STUPEFY  THEMSELVES?    31 


People  drink  and  smoke,  not  casually,  not  from 
dulness,  not  to  cheer  themselves  up,  not  because  it  is 
pleasant,  but  in  order  to  drown  the  voice  of  conscience 
in  themselves.  And  if  that  is  so,  how  terrible  must 
be  the  consequences  !  Indeed,  think  what  a  building- 
would  be  like  erected  by  people  who  did  not  use  a 
straight  plumb-rule  to  get  the  walls  perpendicular,  nor 
right-angled  squares  to  get  the  corners  correct,  but 
used  a  soft  rule  which  would  bend  to  suit  all  irregu- 
larities in  the  walls,  and  a  square  that  expanded  to  fit 
any  angle,  acute  or  obtuse. 

Yet,  thanks  to  self-stupefaction,  that  is  just  what  is 
being  done  in  life.  Life  does  not  accord  with  con- 
science, so  conscience  is  made  to  bend  to  life. 

This  is  done  in  the  life  of  individuals,  and  it  is  done 
in  the  life  of  humanity  as  a  whole,  which  consists  of 
the  lives  of  individuals. 

To  grasp  the  full  significance  of  such  stupefying  of 
one's  consciousness,  let  each  one  carefully  recall  the 
spiritual  conditions  he  has  passed  through  at  each 
period  of  his  life.  Every  one  will  find  that  at  each 
period  of  his  life  certain  moral  questions  confronted 
him,  which  he  ought  to  solve,  and  on  the  solution  of 
which  the  whole  welfare  of  his  life  depended.  For 
the  solution  of  these  questions  great  concentration  of 
attention  was  needful.  Such  concentration  of  attention 
is  a  labour.  In  every  labour,  especially  at  the  com- 
mencement, there  is  a  time  when  the  work  seems  diffi- 
cult and  painful,  and  wrhen  human  weakness  prompts 
a  desire  to  abandon  it.  Physical  work  seems  painful 
at  first;  mental  work  seems  yet  more  painful.  As 
Lessing  says  :  people  are  inclined  to  cease  to  think  at 
the  point  at  which  thought  begins  to  be  difficult  ;  but 
it  is  just  there,  1  would  add,  that  thinking  begins  to 
be  fruitful.  A  man  feels  that  to  decide  the  ques- 
tions confronting  him  needs  labour — often  painful 
labour — and  he  wishes  to  evade  this.  If  he  had  no 
means  of  stupefying  his  faculties  he  could  not  expel 


32  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

from  his  consciousness  the  questions  that  confront 
him,  and  the  necessity  of  solving  them  would  he  forced 
upon  him.  But  man  finds  that  there  exists  a  means  to 
drive  off  these  questions  whenever  they  present  them- 
selves— and  he  uses  it.  As  soon  as  the  questions 
awaiting  solution  hegin  to  torment  him  he  has  re- 
course to  these  means,  and  avoids  the  disquietude 
evoked  by  the  troublesome  questions.  Consciousness 
ceases  to  demand  their  solution,  and  the  unsolved 
questions  remain  unsolved  till  his  next  period  of  en- 
lightenment. But  when  that  period  comes,  the  same 
thing  is  repeated,  and  the  man  goes  on  for  months, 
years,  or  even  for  his  whole  life,  standing  before  those 
same  moral  questions,  and  not  moving  a  step  towards 
their  solution.  Yet  it  is  in  the  solution  of  moral  ques- 
tions that  life's  whole  movement  consists. 

What  occurs  is  as  if  a  man  who  needs  to  see  to  the 
bottom  of  some  muddy  water  to  obtain  a  precious  pearl, 
but  who  dislikes  entering  the  water,  should  stir  it  up 
each  time  it  begins  to  settle  and  become  clear.  Many 
a  man  continues  to  stupefy  himself  all  his  life  long, 
and  remains  immovable  at  the  same,  once-accepted, 
obscure,  self-contradictory  view  of  life — pressing,  as 
each  period  of  enlightenment  approaches,  ever  at  one 
and  the  same  wall  against  which  he  pressed  ten  or 
twenty  years  ago,  and  which  he  cannot  break  through 
because  he  intentionally  blunts  that  sharp  point  of 
thought  which  alone  could  pierce  it. 

Let  each  man  remember  himself  as  he  has  been 
during  the  years  of  his  drinking  or  smoking,  and  let  him 
test  the  matter  in  his  experience  of  other  people,  and 
every  one  will  see  a  definite  constant  line  dividing  those 
who  are  addicted  to  stupefiers  from  those  who  are  free 
from  them.  The  more  a  man  stupefies  himself,  the 
more  he  is  morally  immovable. 


Terrible,  as  they  are  described  to  us,  are  the  conse- 
quences of  opium  and  hashish  on  individuals  ;  terrible, 
as  we  know  them,  are  the  consequences  of  alcohol  to 


WHY  DO  MEN  STUPEFY  THEMSELVES?    33 

flagrant  drunkards  ;  but  incomparably  more  terrible 
to  our  whole  society  are  the  consequences  of  what  is 
considered  the  harmless,  moderate  use  of  spirits,  wine, 
beer,  and  tobacco,  to  which  the  majority  of  men,  and 
especially  our  so-called  cultured  classes,  are  addicted. 

The  consequences  must  naturally  be  terrible,  admit- 
ting the  fact,  which  must  be  admitted — that  the  guid- 
ing activities  of  society  :  political,  official,  scientific, 
literary,  and  artistic — are  carried  on,  for  the  most  part, 
by  people  in  an  abnormal  state :  by  people  who  are 
drunk. 

•  It  is  generally  supposed  that  a  man  who,  like  most 
people  of  our  well-to-do  classes,  takes  alcoholic  drink 
almost  every  time  he  eats,  is,  next  day,  during  work- 
ing hours,  in  a  perfectly  normal  and  sober  condition. 
But  this  is  quite  an  error.  A  man  who  drank  a  bottle 
of  wine,  a  glass  of  spirits,  or  two  glasses  of  ale,  yester- 
day, is  now  in  the  usual  state  of  drowsiness  or  depres- 
sion which  follows  excitement,  and  is  therefore  in  a 
condition  of  mental  prostration,  which  is  increased  by 
smoking.  For  a  man  who  habitually  smokes  and 
drinks  in  moderation,  to  bring  his  brain  into  a  normal 
condition  would  require  at  least  a  week,  or  more  of 
abstinence  from  wine  and  tobacco.  But  that  hardly 
ever  occurs.* 

*  But  how  is  it  that  people  who  do  not  drink  or  smoke 
are  often  morally  on  an  incomparably  lower  plane  than 
others  who  drink  and  smoke  ?  And  why  do  people  who 
drink  and  smoke  often  manifest  the  highest  qualities  both 
•mentally  and  morally  ? 

The  answer  is,  first,  that  we  do  not  know  the  height  that 
those  who  drink  and  smoke  would  have  attained  had  they 
not  drunk  and  smoked.  And,  secondly,  from  the  fact  that 
morally  gifted  people  achieve  great  things  in  spite  of  the 
deteriorating  effect  of  stupefying  substances,  we  can  but 
conclude  that  they  would  have  produced  yet  greater  things 
had  they  not  stupefied  themselves.  It  is  very  probable,  as 
a  friend  remarked  to  me,  that  Kant's  works  would  not  have 
been  written  in  such  a  curious  and  bad  style  had  he  not 
smoked  so  much.     Lastly,  the  lower  a  man's  mental  and 

c 


34  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

So  that  most  of  what  goes  on  among  us,  whether 
done  by  people  who  rule  and  teach  others,  or  by  those 
who  are  ruled  and  taught,  is  done  when  the  doers  are 
not  sober. 

And  let  not  this  be  taken  as  a  joke  or  an  exaggera- 
tion ;  the  confusion,  and,  above  all,  the  imbecility,  of 
our  lives,  arises  chiefly  from  the  constant  state  of  in- 
toxication in  which  most  people  live.  Could  people 
who  are  not  drunk  possibly  do  all  that  is  being  done 
around  us — from  building  the  Eiffel  Tower  to  accepting 
military  service  ? 

Without  any  need  whatever,  a  company  is  formed, 
capital  collected,  men  labour,  make  calculations,  and 
draw  plans  ;  millions  of  working  days  and  thousands  of 
tons  of  iron  are  spent  to  build  a  tower  ;  and  millions  of 
people  consider  it  their  duty  to  climb  up  it,  stop  awhile 
on  it,  and  then  climb  down  again  ;  and  the  building 
and  visiting  of  this  tower  evoke  no  other  reflection  than 
a  wish  and  intention  to  build  other  towers,  in  other 
places,  still  bigger.  Could  sober  people  act  like  that  ? 
Or  take  another  case.  All  the  European  peoples  have 
for  dozens  of  years  past  been  busy  devising  the  very 
best  ways  of  killing  people,  and  teaching  as  many  young 
men  as  possible,  as  soon  as  they  reach  manhood,  how 
to  murder.  Everyone  knows  that  there  can  be  no 
invasion  by  barbarians,  but  that  these  preparations 
made  by  the  different  civilized  and  Christian  nations 
are  directed  against  one  another  ;  all  know  that  this  is 
burdensome,  painful,  inconvenient,  ruinous,  immoral, 
impious,  and  irrational — but  all  continue  to  prepare  for 
mutual  murder.  Some  devise  political  combinations  to 
decide  who,  with  what  allies,  is  to  kill  whom  ;  others 

moral  plane,  the  less  does  he  feel  the  discord  between  his 
conscience  and  his  life,  and,  therefore,  the  less  does  he  feel 
a  craving  to  stupefy  himself;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  a 
parallel  reason  explains  why  the  most  sensitive  natures — 
those  which  immediately  and  morbidly  feel  the  discord 
between  life  and  conscience — so  often  indulge  in  narcotics 
and  perish  by  them. — L.  T. 


WHY  DO  MEN  STUPEFY  THEMSELVES  ?    35 

direct  those  who  are  being  taught  to  murder  ;  and 
others,  again,  yield — against  their  will,  against  their 
conscience,  against  their  reason — to  these  preparations 
for  murder.  Could  sober  people  do  these  things  ? 
Only  drunkards  who  never  reach  a  state  of  sobriety 
could  do  them,  and  could  live  on  in  the  horrible  state 
of  discord  between  life  and  conscience  in  which,  not 
only  in  this,  but  in  all  other  respects,  the  people  of 
our  society  are  now  living. 

Never  before,  I  suppose,  have  people  lived  with  the 
demands  of  their  conscience  so  evidently  in  contradic- 
tion to  their  actions. 

Humanity  to-day  has,  as  it  were,  stuck  fast.  It  is  as 
though  some  external  cause  hindered  it  from  occupying 
a  position  naturally  in  accord  with  its  perceptions. 
And  the  cause — if  not  the  only  one,  then  certainly  the 
greatest — is  this  physical  condition  of  stupefaction,  to 
which,  by  wine  and  tobacco,  the  great  majority  ot 
people  in  our  society  reduce  themselves. 

Emancipation  from  this  terrible  evil  will  be  an  epoch 
in  the  life  of  humanity  ;  and  that  epoch  seems  to  be  at 
hand.  The  evil  is  recognised.  An  alteration  has 
already  taken  place  in  our  perception  concerning  the 
use  of  stupefying  substances.  People  have  understood 
the  terrible  harm  of  these  things,  and  are  beginning  to 
point  them  out,  and  this  almost  unnoticed  alteration  in 
perception  will  inevitably  bring  about  the  emancipation 
of  men  from  the  use  of  stupefying  things — will  enable 
them  to  open  their  eyes  to  the  demands  of  their  con- 
sciences, and  they  will  begin  to  order  their  lives  in 
accord  with  their  perceptions. 

And  this  seems  to  be  already  beginning.  But,  as 
always,  it  is  beginning  among  the  upper  classes  only 
after  all  the  lower  classes  have  already  been  infected. 

[June  10,  o.s.,  1890.] 

The  above  essay  was  written  by  Leo  Tolstoy  as  a  preface 
to  a  book  on  Drunkenness  written  by  my  brother-in-law, 
Dr.  P.  S.  Alexeyef.— A.  M. 

c  2 


Ill 

AN  AFTERWORD  TO  <  THE  KREUTZER 
SONATA ' 

Many  letters  from  strangers  have  reached  and  still 
continue  to  reach  me  asking  for  a  clear  and  simple 
explanation  of  what  1  meant  by  the  story  called  '  The 
Kreutzer  Sonata. '  1  will  try,  to  the  best  of  my  ability, 
to  do  what  is  asked  of  me,  and  explain  briefly  the 
essence  of  what  I  wished  that  story  to  convey,  as  well 
as  the  conclusions  which,  I  think,  may  be  derived 
from  it. 

In  the  first  place  I  wished  to  say  that  a  strong  opinion 
has  taken  root  in  all  classes  of  our  society,  and  is 
supported  by  pseudo-science,  to  the  effect  that  sexual 
intercourse  is  indispensable  to  health,  and  that,  since 
marriage  is  sometimes  out  of  the  question,  sexual  inter- 
course without  marriage  and  without  involving  the  man 
in  any  obligation  beyond  a  monetary  payment,  is  per- 
fectly natural,  and  should  therefore  be  encouraged. 

To  such  an  extent  has  this  opinion  prevailed  and  so 
firmly  is  it  established,  that  parents  on  the  advice  of 
doctors  actually  arrange  debauchery  for  their  children  ; 
while  Governments — whose  only  purpose  should  be  the 
moral  well-being  of  their  citizens — organize  debauchery 
by  regulating  an  entire  class  of  women  destined  to 
perish  physically  and  morally  for  the  satisfaction  of 
the  supposed  needs  of  men  J*  and  unmarried  people, 

*  The  registration  and  medical  examination  of  prostitutes, 
which  was  long  practised  in  our  garrisoned  towns,  is  still 
generally,  systematically,  and  unblusliingly  carried  on  in 
Russian  towns,  on  behalf  of  the  civil  as  well  as  the  military 
population. 

[36] 


AN  AFTERWORD  37 

with  untroubled  consciences,  yield  themselves  to  de- 
bauchery. 

I  intended  to  say  that  this  is  wrong  ;  for  it  cannot  be 
right  that  some  people  should  be  destroyed  body  and 
soul  for  the  health  of  others,  any  more  than  it  can  be 
right  that  some  people  for  their  health's  sake  should 
drink  the  blood  of  others. 

The  natural  conclusion  I  would  draw  is  that  we  must 
not  yield  to  this  error  and  deception.  And  to  withstand 
it  we  must  refuse  to  accept  immoral  doctrines,  no  matter 
what  false  sciences  are  quoted  in  their  support.  And 
we  must,  moreover,  understand  that  sexual  intercourse 
in  which  people  either  abandon  the  children  who  come 
as  a  result  of  their  actions,  or  throw  the  whole  burden  of 
them  on  to  the  woman,  or  prevent  the  possibility  of  their 
birth,  is  a  violation  of  the  plainest  claims  of  morality, 
and  is  shameful.  And  unmarried  people  who  do  not 
wish  to  act  shamefully  should  refrain  from  such  conduct. 

That  they  may  be  able  to  refrain,  they  must  lead  a 
natural  life  :  not  drink  intoxicants,  nor  overeat,  nor 
eat  flesh-meat,  nor  shirk  labour  (not  gymnastics  or 
play,  but  real  fatiguing  labour).  Furthermore,  they 
must  not  tolerate,  even  in  thought,  the  possibility  of 
intercourse  with  strange  women,  any  more  than  with 
their  own  mothers,  sisters,  near  relatives,  or  the  wives 
of  their  friends. 

That  self-restraint  is  not  only  possible,  but  less 
dangerous  or  harmful  to  one's  health  than  incontinence, 
is  a  fact  of  which  any  man  may  find  hundreds  of  proofs 
around  him. 

That  is  the  first  thing  I  wanted  to  say. 

Next — as  a  result  of  the  fact  that  people  regard 
amatory  intercourse  as  both  a  necessary  condition  of 
health  and  a  pleasure,  and,  more  than  that,  as  a  poetic 
and  elevating  blessing — conjugal  infidelity  has,  in  all 
classes  of  our  society,  become  extremely  common. 
(Among  the  peasants  conjugal  infidelity  is  specially  due 
to  army  service.) 

And  this  I  consider  wrong.  And  the  conclusion  to 
be  drawn  is — that  people  should  not  behave  so. 


38  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

And  in  order  that  they  may  not  behave  so,  it  is 
necessary  that  this  view  of  sex-love  should  he  altered. 
Men  and  women  must  be  trained,  both  by  their  parents 
and  by  public  opinion,  to  look  on  falling  in  love  and 
the  accompanying  sexual  desire — whether  before  or 
after  marriage — not  as  the  poetic  and  elevated  state 
it  is  now  considered  to  be,  but  as  an  animal  state  de- 
grading to  a  human  being.  And  the  breach  of  the 
promise  of  fidelity  given  at  marriage  should  be  dealt 
with  by  public  opinion  at  least  as  severely  as  a  breach 
of  pecuniary  obligation,  or  a  business  fraud,  and  should 
on  no  account  be  eulogized,  as  is  now  done  in  novels, 
poems,  songs,  operas,  etc. 

That  is  my  second  point. 

Thirdly  (in  consequence,  again,  of  the  false  opinion 
held  in  our  society  about  physical  love),  child-bearing 
is  not  properly  regarded,  and,  instead  of  being  the  aim 
and  the  justification  of  marriage,  it  has  become  an 
impediment  to  the  pleasurable  continuance  of  amorous 
relations,  and  consequently,  both  among  married  and 
unmarried  people  (instructed  by  exponents  of  medical 
science),  the  employment  of  means  to  prevent  the 
birth  of  children  has  spread  ;  and  a  practice  has  become 
common  which  did  not  exist  formerly,  and  does  not 
now  exist  in  patriarchal  peasant  families — the  continua- 
tion of  conjugal  relations  during  the  months  of  preg- 
nancy and  while  the  woman  is  still  nursing. 

And  I  think  such  conduct  as  that  is  wrong. 

To  use  means  to  prevent  child-birth  is  wrong  :  first, 
because  it  frees  the  parents  from  the  anxiety  and  care 
for  the  children  which  are  the  redeeming  feature  ill 
sexual  love,  and,  secondly,  because  it  is  an  action  very 
near  to  that  which  is  most  shocking  to  man's  conscience, 
namely,  murder.  And  incontinence  at  the  time  of 
pregnancy  and  nursing  is  wrong,  because  it  wastes  the 
physical,  and,  above  all,  the  spiritual,  strength  of  the 
woman. 

The  deduction  which  follows  from  this  is,  that  such 
things  should  be  avoided.  And,  in  order  to  avoid 
them,  it  should  be  understood  that  continence,  which 


AN  AFTERWORD  39 

is  an  indispensable  condition  of  human  dignity  to  the 
unmarried,  is  still  more  obligatory  on  the  married. 

That  is  the  third  point. 

Fourthly,  in  our  society — in  which  children  are 
regarded  as  an  impediment  to  enjoyment,  or  as  an 
unlucky  accident,  or  (if  only  a  prearranged  number 
are  born)  as  a  special  kind  of  pleasure — what  is  con- 
sidered in  their  training  is  not  their  preparation  for 
the  duties  of  life  which  await  them  as  reasonable  and 
loving  beings,  but  merely  the  gratification  they  may 
afford  to  their  parents.  The  result  is  that  human 
children  are  brought  up  like  the  young  of  animals,  and 
the  chief  care  of  the  parents  (encouraged  by  false 
medical  science)  is,  not  to  prepare  them  for  activities 
worthy  of  human  beings,  but  to  overfeed  them,  to 
increase  their  size,  and  to  make  them  clean,  white, 
well-conditioned  and  handsome.  (If  this  is  not  the 
case  among  the  lower  classes,  it  is  only  because  they 
cannot  afford  it.  They  look  on  the  matter  just  as  the 
upper  classes  do.) 

And  in  these  pampered  children  (as  in  all  overfed 
animals)  an  overpowering  sexual  sensitiveness  shows 
itself  unnaturally  early,  causing  them  terrible  distress 
as  they  approach  the  age  of  puberty.  All  the  surround- 
ings of  their  life  :  clothes,  books,  sight-seeing,  music, 
dances,  dainty  fare— everything,  from  the  pictures  on 
their  boxes  of  bon-bons  to  the  stories,  novels,  and 
poems  they  read — more  and  more  increases  this  sensi- 
tiveness, and,  as  a  result,  the  most  terrible  sexual 
vices  and  diseases  are  frequent  incidents  in  the  life  of 
children  of  both  sexes,  and  often  retain  their  hold  after 
maturity  is  reached. 

And  I  consider  that  this  is  wrong.  And  the  conclu- 
sion to  be  drawn  is  that  human  children  should  not  be 
brought  up  like  the  young  of  animals,  but  in  the  educa- 
tion of  human  children  other  results  should  be  aimed 
at  than  producing  handsome,  well-kept  bodies. 

That  is  the  fourth  point. 

Fifthly,  in  our  society,  where  the  falling  in  love 
of  young  men   and  women  (which   still  has  physical 


40  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

attraction  as  its  root)  is  extolled  as  though  it  were  the 
highest  and  most  poetic  aim  of  human  endeavour  (as 
all  our  art  and  poetry  hears  witness),  young  people 
devote  the  best  part  of  their  lives — the  men  to  spying 
out,  pursuing,  and  obtaining  (whether  in  marriage  or 
free  union),  those  best  suited  to  attract  them ;  the 
women  and  girls  to  enticing  and  entrapping  men  into 
free  unions  or  marriages. 

In  this  way  the  best  powers  of  many  people  run  to 
waste  in  activity  not  merely  unproductive  but  injurious. 
Most  of  our  insensate  luxury  results  from  this,  as  well 
as  most  of  the  idleness  of  the  men  and  the  shameless- 
ness  of  the  women  who  are  not  above  following  fashions 
admittedly  borrowed  from  depraved  women,  and  ex- 
posing parts  of  the  body  that  excite  sensuality. 

And  this,  I  think,  is  wrong. 

It  is  wrong  because,  however  it  may  be  idealized,  to 
obtain  connection — in  marriage  or  without  marriage — 
with  the  object  of  one's  love  is  an  aim  as  unworthy  of 
a  man  as  is  that  of  securing  tasty  and  abundant  food, 
which  seems  to  many  people  the  highest  good. 

The  conclusion  to  be  drawn  from  this  is  that  we  must 
cease  to  consider  sex-love  as  something  specially 
elevated,  and  must  understand  that  no  aim  that  we 
count  worthy  of  a  man — whether  it  be  the  service  of 
humanity,  fatherland,  science  or  art  (not  to  speak  of  the 
service  of  God) — can  be  attained  by  means  of  connec- 
tion with  the  object  of  one's  love  (either  with  or  with- 
out a  marriage  rite).  On  the  contrary,  falling  in  love 
and  connection  (however  men  may  seek  to  prove  the  con- 
trary in  prose  and  verse)  never  facilitate,  but  always 
impede,  the  attainment  of  any  aim  worthy  of  man. 

That  is  the  fifth  point. 

That  is  the  substance  of  what  I  wanted  to  say,  and 
thought  I  had  said,  by  my  story  ;  and  it  seemed  to  me 
that  one  might  discuss  the  question  of  how  to  remedy 
the  evils  indicated,  but  that  it  was  impossible  not  to 
agree  with  the  considerations  advanced.  It  seemed 
impossible  not  to  agree  :  first,  because  these  considera- 
tions quite  coincide  with  what  we  know  of  the  progress  of 


AN  AFTERWORD  41 

mankind  (which  has  ever  advanced  from  dissoluteness  to 
greater  and  greater  purity),  and  accord  also  with  the  moral 
perceptions  of  the  community,  and  with  our  conscience, 
which  always  condemns  dissoluteness  and  esteems  chas- 
tity.* Secondly,  hecause  these  propositions  are  merely 
unavoidable  conclusions  from  the  Gospel  teaching, 
which  we  either  profess  or  at  least  (even  if  uncon- 
sciously) admit  to  lie  at  the  root  of  our  ideas  of 
morality. 

But  1  was  mistaken. 

No  one,  it  is  true,  directly  disputes  the  statements 
that  one  should  not  be  dissolute  either  before  or  after 
marriage,  should  not  artificially  prevent  childbirth, 
should  not  make  toys  of  one's  children,  and  should  not 
put  amatory  intercourse  above  everything  else.  In 
short,  no  one  denies  that  chastity  is  better  than 
depravity.  But  it  is  said  :  ( If  abstinence  is  better  than 
marriage,  people  ought  certainly  to  follow  the  better 
course.  But  if  they  do,  then  the  human  race  will  come 
to  an  end,  and  the  ideal  for  the  race  cannot  be — its  own 
extinction/  But — apart  from  the  fact  that  the  extinc- 
tion of  the  human  race  is  not  a  new  idea,  but  is  for 
religious  people  one  of  the  dogmas  of  their  faith,  and 
for  scientists  an  inevitable  conclusion  from  observations 
of  the  cooling  of  the  sun — there  is  in  that  rejoinder  a 
great,  wide-spread,  and  old  misunderstanding.  It  is 
said :  ( If  men  act  up  to  the  ideal  of  perfect  chastity, 
they  will  become  extinct ;  therefore  the  ideal  is  false/ 
But  those  who  speak  so,  intentionally  or  unintention- 
ally confuse  two  different  things — a  rule  or  precept, 
and  an  ideal. 

Chastity  is  not  a  rule  or  precept,  but  an  ideal,  or, 
rather,  one  condition  of  the  ideal.  But  an  ideal  is  an  ideal 
only  when  its  accomplishment  is  only  possible  in  idea, 
in  thought,  when  it  appears  attainable  only  in  infinity, 
and  when  the  possibility  of  approaching  towards  it  is 
therefore  infinite.     If  the  ideal  were  attained,  or  if  we 

*  The  word  is  used  in  the  sense  of  complete  purity  of 
mind  and  body,  such  as  is  commonly  attributed  to  Jesus. 


42  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

could  even  picture  its  attainment  by  mankind,  it  would 
cease  to  be  an  ideal. 

Such  was  Christ's  ideal — the  establishment  of  the 
kingdom  of  God  on  earth— an  ideal  already  foretold  by 
the  prophets,  of  a  time  when  all  men  will  be  taught  of 
God,  will  beat  their  swords  into  ploughshares  and  their 
spears  into  pruning-hooks  ;  when  the  lion  will  lie  down 
with  the  lamb,  and  all  will  be  united  in  love.  The 
whole  meaning  of  human  life  lies  in  progress  towards 
that  ideal ;  and  therefore  the  striving  towards  the 
Christian  ideal  in  its  completeness,  and  towards  chastity  as 
one  of  its  conditions,  is  farfrom  rendering  life  impossible. 
On  the  contrary,  the  absence  of  that  ideal  would  destroy 
progress,  and  with  it  the  possibility  of  real  life. 

Arguments  to  the  effect  that  the  human  race  will 
end  if  men  strive  with  all  their  might  towards  chastity, 
are  like  the  one  (sometimes  actually  used)  to  the  effect 
that  the  race  will  perish  if  men  try  their  best  to  sub- 
stitute the  love  of  friends,  of  enemies,  and  of  all 
that  lives,  for  the  prevailing  struggle  for  existence. 
Such  arguments  come  from  not  understanding  the 
difference  between  two  methods  of  moral  guidance. 

As  there  are  two  ways  of  telling  a  traveller  his  road, 
so  there  are  two  methods  of  moral  guidance  for  seekers 
after  truth.  One  way  consists  in  pointing  out  the 
objects  that  will  be  met  on  the  road,  by  which  the 
traveller  can  shape  his  course  ;  the  other  way  consists 
in  only  giving  him  the  direction  by  a  compass  he  carries, 
and  on  which  he  sees  one  invariable  direction,  and  con- 
sequently is  made  aware  of  every  divergence  from  it. 

The  first  method  of  moral  guidance  is  by  externally 
denned  rules  :  certain  definite  actions  are  indicated 
which  a  man  must,  or  must  not,  perform. 

'-.  Keep  the  Sabbath ;'  '  Be  circumcised  ;'  '  Do  not 
steal ;'  '  Abstain  from  wine  ;'  '  Do  not  destroy  life  ;' 
'  Give  tithes  to  the  poor  ;'  *  Wash  and  pray  five  times 
daily;'  '  Baptize;'  (  Receive  the  Eucharist,'  etc.  Such 
are  the  ordinances  of  external  religious  teaching  : 
Brahnrinical,  Buddhist,  Mohammedan  or  Jewish,  and  of 
Ecclesiasticism,  falsely  called  Christianity. 


AN  AFJTERWORD  43 

The  other  method  consists  in  indicating1  a  perfection 
man  can  never  reach,  but  which  he  consciously  desires. 
An  ideal  is  set  before  him  by  attending  to  which  he 
can  always  see  to  what  extent  he  deviates  from  the 
right  road. 

''Love  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul, 
and  with  all  thy  mind,  and  thy  neighbour  as  thyself/ 
6  Be  perfect  as  your  heavenly  Father  is  perfect/  Such 
is  the  teaching  of  Christ. 

The  test  of  fulfilment  of  external  religious  teachings 
is  the  conformity  of  our  conduct  to  the  injunctions 
given,  and  such  conformity  is  possible. 

The  test  of  the  fulfilment  of  Christ's  teaching  lies  in 
a  consciousness  of  the  extent  of  one's  deviation  from  the 
ideal  perfection.  (The  degree  of  one's  approach  to  it  is 
not  seen  ;  but  the  degree  of  deviation  from  it  is  seen.) 

A  man  who  accepts  an  external  law  is  like  a  man 
standing  in  the  light  thrown  by  a  lantern  fixed  to  a 
post.  He  stands  in  the  light  of  this  lantern,  and  it  is 
light,  around  him,  but  he  has  no  place  towards  which  to 
advance.  A  man  who  accepts  Christ's  teaching  is  like  one 
who  carries  a  lantern  before  him  on  a  pole  :  the  light 
is  always  before  him,  and  by  lighting  up  fresh  ground 
which  attracts  him,  always  invites  him  to  advance. 

The  Pharisee  thanks  God  he  has  fulfilled  the  whole 
law.  The  rich  young  man  has  also  from  his  childhood 
fulfilled  all,  and  cannot  understand  what  more  can  be 
demanded.  Nor  can  they  think  otherwise :  they  see 
nothing  ahead  of  them  towards  which  they  might 
aspire.  Tithes  have  been  paid ;  Sabbaths  observed  ; 
parents  honoured  ;  they  have  not  committed  adultery, 
nor  stolen,  nor  murdered.  What  more  can  be  re- 
quired ?  But  for  him  who  follows  the  Christian  teach- 
ing, each  step  gained  towards  perfection  makes  plain 
the  need  of  ascending  another,  from  which  he  perceives 
a  yet  higher,  and  so  on  without  end.  He  who  follows 
the  law  of  Christ  is  always  in  the  position  of  the 
Publican — always  conscious  of  imperfection,  he  does 
not  look  behind  him  at  the  road  he  has  passed,  but  sees 
always  before  him  the  road  he  has  still  to  travel. 


44  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

In  this  lies  the  difference  between  Christ's  teaching 
and  all  other  religious  teachings  ;  a  difference  not  in 
the  demands  made,  but  in  the  guidance  afforded.  Jesus 
did  not  lay  down  rules  of  life.  He  established  no 
institutions,  and  did  not  institute  marriage.  But  men 
(not  understanding  the  character  of  Christ's  teaching, 
and  accustomed  to  external  teachings)  wished  to  feel 
themselves  justified — as  the  Pharisee  felt  himself  justi- 
fied— and  from  the  letter  of  his  teaching,  but  contrary 
to  its  whole  spirit,  have  constructed  an  external  code  of 
rules  called  Church  doctrine,  and  with  it  have  sup- 
planted Christ's  true  teaching  of  the  ideal. 

This  has  been  done  concerning  government,  law, 
war,  the  Church,  and  Church  worship  ;  and  it  has  also 
been  done  in  relation  to  marriage. 

In  spite  of  the  fact  that  Jesus  not  only  never  insti- 
tuted marriage,  but  (if  we  must  seek  external  regula- 
tions) rather  discountenanced  it  ('  Leave  thy  wife  and 
follow  me  '),  the  Church  doctrine  (called  Christian)  has 
established  marriage  as  a  Christian  institution.  That 
is  to  say,  it  has  defined  certain  external  conditions 
under  which  sexual  love  is  supposed  to  be  quite  right 
and  lawful  for  a  Christian. 

As,  fhowever,  the  institution  of  marriage  has  no  basis 
whatever  in  true  Christianity,  the  result  has  been  that 
people  in  our  society  have  quitted  one  shore,  but  have 
not  reached  the  other.  They  do  not  really  believe  in 
the  ecclesiastical  definitions  of  marriage,  for  they  feel 
that  such  an  institution  has  no  foundation  in  Christ's 
teaching ;  yet  as  they  do  not  perceive  Christ's  ideal 
(which  the  Church  doctrine  has  hidden) — the  ideal  of 
striving  towards  complete  chastity — they  are  left,  in 
relation  to  marriage,  quite  without  guidance.  This 
explains  the  fact  (which  seems  so  strange  at  first 
sight)  that  among  Jews,  Mohammedans,  Lamaists,  and 
others  professing  religious  doctrines  much  lower  than 
the  Christian,  but  having  strict  external  regulations 
concerning  marriage,  the  family  principle  and  conjugal 
fidelity  are  far  firmer  than  in  so-called  Christian 
society.     Those  people  have  their  regular  systems  of 


AN  AFTERWORD  45 

concubinage,  or  polygamy,  or  polyandry,  confined 
within  certain  bounds.  Among  us  wholesale  dissolute- 
ness finds  place :  concubinage,  polygamy,  and  polyandry, 
free  from  all  limitations,  and  concealed  by  the  pretence 
of  monogamy. 

F6r  no  better  reason  than  because  the  clergy,  for 
money,  perform  certain  ceremonies  (called  marriage 
services)  over  a  certain  number  of  those  who  unite, 
people  in  our  society  naively  or  hypocritically  imagine 
that  we  are  a  monogamous  people. 

There  never  was,  or  could  be,  such  a  thing  as  Christian 
marriage,  any  more  than  Christian  worship,*  Christian 
teachers  and  Fathers  of  the  Church,  t  Christian  pro- 

*  '  And  when  ye  pray,  ye  shall  not  be  as  the  hypocrites : 
for  they  love  to  stand  and  pray  in  congregations  and  in  the 
corners  of  the  streets,  that  they  may  be  seen  of  men. 
Verily  I  say  unto  you,  they  have  received  their  reward. 
But  thou,  when  thou  prayest,  enter  into  thine  inner 
chamber,  and  having  shut  thy  door,  pray  to  thy  Father 
which  is  in  secret,  and  thy  Father  which,  seeth  in  secret, 
shall  recompense  thee.  And  in  praying  use  not  vain  repe- 
titions as  the  Gentiles  do :  for  they  think  they  shall  be 
heard  for  their  much  speaking.  Be  not  therefore  like  unto 
them :  for  your  Father  knoweth  what  things  ye  have  need 
of,  before  ye  ask  him.' — Matt.  vi.  5-12. 

'  Woman,  believe  me,  the  hour  cometh,  when  neither  in 
this  mountain,  nor  in  Jerusalem,  shall  you  worship  the 
Father.  You  know  not  whom  you  worship,  but  we  worship 
him  whom  we  know.  But  the  hour  cometh,  and  now  is, 
when  the  true  worshippers  shall  worship  the  Father  in  spirit 
and  by  deeds  :  for  such  doth  the  Father  seek  to  be  his 
worshippers.  God  is  a  Spirit,  and  must  be  worshipped  in 
spirit  and  by  deeds.'— John  iv.  21-24. 

f  '  But  be  not  ye  called  teachers  :  for  one  is  your  Teacher, 
and  all  ye  are  brethren.  And  call  no  man  your  father  on 
the  earth :  for  one  is  your  Father,  which  is  in  heaven. 
Neither  be  ye  called  masters  :  for  one  is  your  Master,  even 
the  Christ.' — Matt,  xxiii.  8-10. 

(Where  the  Revised  Version  is  not  followed,  Tolstoy's 
Union  and  Translation  of  the  Four  Gospels  has  been 
used. ) 


46  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

perty,  armies,  law-courts,  or  Governments,  and  this 
was  understood  by  Christians  who  lived  in  the  first 
centuries. 

The  Christian  ideal  is  that  of  love  to  God  and  to 
one's  fellow-man :  it  is  the  renunciation  of  one's  self 
for  the  service  of  God  and  one's  neighbour ;  whereas 
sexual  love,  marriage,  is  a  service  of  self,  and  con- 
sequently in  any  case  an  obstacle  to  the  service  of  God 
and  man,  and  therefore,  from  a  Christian  point  of  view, 
a  fall,  a  sin. 

To  get  married  would  not  help  the  service  of  God 
and  man,  though  it  were  done  to  perpetuate  the  human 
race.  For  that  purpose,  instead  of  getting  married  and 
producing  fresh  children,  it  would  be  much  simpler  to 
save  and  rear  those  millions  of  children  who  are  now 
perishing  around  us  for  lack  of  food  for  their  bodies, 
not  to  mention  food  for  their  souls. 

Only  if  he  were  sure  all  existing  children  were 
provided  for  could  a  Christian  enter  upon  marriage 
without  being  conscious  of  a  moral  fall. 

It  may  be  possible  to  reject  Christ's  teaching — which 
permeates  our  whole  life  and  on  which  all  our  morality 
is  founded — but  once  that  teaching  is  accepted,  we 
cannot  but  admit  that  it  points  to  the  ideal  of  complete 
chastity. 

For  in  the  Gospels  it  is  said  clearly,  and  so  that  there 
is  no  possibility  of  misinterpretation :  First,  that  a 
married  man  should  not  divorce  his  wife  to  take 
another,  but  should  live  with  her  whom  he  has  once 
taken. *  Secondly,  that  it  is  wrong  (and  it  is  said  of 
men  generally,  married  or  unmarried)  to  look  on  a 

*  c  It  was  said  also,  Whosoever  shall  put  away  his  wife, 
let  him  give  her  a  writing  of  divorcement :  but  I  say  unto 
you,  that  if  anyone  putteth  away  his  wife,  not  only  is  he 
guilty  of  wantonness,  but  he  leads  her  to  adultery :  and 
whosoever  shall  marry  her  when  she  is  put  away  committeth 
adultery. '—Matt.  v.  31,  32. 

1  He  saith  unto  them,  Moses  for  your  coarseness  let  you 
divorce  from  your  wives :  but  this  from  the  first  was  not 
right' — Matt.  xix.  8. 


AN  AFTERWORD  47 

woman  as  an  object  of  desire.*  And,  thirdly,  that  for 
the  unmarried  it  is  better  not  to  marry— i.e.,  it  is 
better  to  be  quite  chaste. t 

To  most  people  these  thoughts  will  seem  strange,  and 
even  contradictory.  And  they  really  are  contradictory, 
not  in  themselves  but  to  the  whole  manner  of  our  lives  : 
and  the  question  naturally  presents  itself:  e Which  is 
right  ?  These  thoughts,  or  the  lives  lived  by  millions, 
including  myself?' 

That  feeling  forced  itself  upon  me  most  strongly 
when  I  approached  the  conclusions  I  now  express.  I 
never  anticipated  that  the  development  of  my  thoughts 
would  bring  me  to  such  a  conclusion.  I  was  startled 
at  my  conclusions  and  did  not  wish  to  believe  them, 
but  it  was  impossible  not  to  believe  them.  And  how- 
ever they  may  run  counter  to  the  whole  arrange- 
ment of  our  lives,  however  they  may  contradict 
what  I  thought  and  said  previously,  I  had  to  admit 
them. 

( But  these  are  all  general  considerations,  which  may 
be  true,  but  relate  to  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  and  are 
binding  only  on  those  who  profess  it.  But  life  is  life, 
and  it  will  not  do  merely  to  point  to  a  distant  and 
unattainable  ideal,  and  then  leave  men  with  no  definite 
guidance  in  face  of  a  burning  question,  which  affects 
every  one  and  causes  terrible  sufferings.     A  young  and 

*  '  Every  one  that  looketh  on  a  woman  to  lust  after  her 
hath  committed  adultery  with  her  already  in  his  heart' — 
Matt.  v.  28. 

t  ■  The  disciples  say  unto  him,  If  the  case  of  a  man  is  so 
with  his  wife,  it  is  not  expedient  to  marry,  But  he  said 
unto  them,  All  men  cannot  receive  this  saying,  but  they  to 
whom  it  is  given.  For  there  are  men  who  are  virgin  from 
lust  from  their  mother's  womb ;  and  there  are  some  who 
have  been  deprived  of  their  desire  by  men,  and  there  are 
some  who  have  become  pure  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven's 
sake.  He  that  is  able  to  receive  it,  let  him  receive  it.' — 
Matt.  xix.  10-12. 

Tolstoy's  A  Union  and  Translation  of  the  Four  Gospels 
has  been  followed  in  these  quotations. 


48  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

passionate  man  may,  at  first,  be  attracted  by  this  ideal, 
but  will  not  hold  to  it,  and  when  once  he  has  broken 
down,  not  knowing  or  acknowledging  any  fixed  rules, 
he  will  lapse  into  complete  depravity/ 

So  people  generally  argue :  '  Christ's  ideal  is  un- 
attainable, therefore  it  cannot  serve  as  a  guide  in 
practical  life  ;  it  may  do  to  talk  about,  or  dream  about, 
but  it  is  not  applicable  to  life,  and  must  therefore  be 
put  aside.  We  do  not  want  an  ideal,  but  a  rule — a 
guidance — suited  to  our  strength  and  to  the  average 
level  of  the  moral  forces  of  our  society  :  honourable 
Church-marriage  ;  or  even  a  marriage  not  quite  honour- 
able, in  which  one  party  (as  occurs  with  men  among 
us)  has  already  known  many  other  women  ;  or,  say, 
marriage  with  the  possibility  of  divorce,  or  civil 
marriage,  or  even  (advancing  in  the  same  direction)  a 
marriage,  Japanese  fashion,  for  a  certain  term' — but 
why  not  go  as  far  as  brothels  ?  They  are  said  to  be 
preferable  to  street  prostitution ! 

That  is  where  the  trouble  comes  in.  Once  you  let 
yourself  lower  the  ideal  to  suit  your  weakness,  there  is 
no  finding  the  line  at  which  to  stop. 

In  reality,  this  argument  is  altogether  unsound.  It 
is  untrue  that  an  ideal  of  infinite  perfection  cannot  be 
a  guide  in  life,  and  that  1  must  either  throw  it  away, 
saying,  ( It  is  useless  to  me  since  I  can  never  reach  it,' 
or  must  lower  it  to  the  level  at  which  it  suits  my  weak- 
ness to  rest. 

To  argue  so  is  as  though  a  mariner  said  to  himself: 
6  Since  I  cannot  keep  to  the  line  indicated  by  the 
compass,  I  must  either  throw  the  compass  overboard 
and  cease  to  bother  with  it*  (i.e.,  must  discard  the 
ideal) ;  '  or  I  must  fix  the  needle  of  the  compass  in  the 
position  which  corresponds  to  the  direction  my  vessel 
is  now  following'  (i.e.,  must  lower  the  ideal  to  suit  my 
own  weakness). 

The  ideal  of  perfection  Jesus  gave  is  not  a  fancy, 
or  a  theme  for  rhetorical  sermons,  but  is  an  indispen- 
sable and  accessible  guide  to  moral  life,  as  the  compass 
is  an  indispensable  and  accessible  instrument  where- 


AN  AFTERWORD  49 

with  to  guide  a  ship.  But  the  one  must  be  believed 
in  as  implicitly  as  the  other. 

In  whatever  position  a  man  may  find  himself,  the 
teaching  of  the  ideal  that  Jesus  gave  is  sufficient  to 
afford  him  always  the  best  indications  as  to  what  he 
should  or  should  not  do.  But  he  must  entirely 
believe  this  teaching,  and  this  alone,  and  must  not 
trust  to  any  other — just  as  a  steersman  guiding  himself 
by  the  compass  must  not  look  to  either  side,  but  must 
keep  his  attention  fixed  on  the  compass. 

One  must  know  how  to  guide  one's  self  by  Christ's 
teaching  as  by  a  compass  ;  and  for  this  the  chief  thing 
is  to  understand  one's  own  position.  One  must  not 
fear  to  define  clearly  one's  own  deviation  from  the 
direction  of  the  ideal.  Whatever  plane  a  man  may  be 
on,  it  is  always  possible  for  him  to  move  towards  the 
ideal,  and  in  no  position  can  he  say  he  has  attained  it 
and  can  approach  no  nearer. 

Such  is  the  case  in  regard  to  man's  aspiration  towards 
the  Christian  ideal  in  general,  and  it  applies  to  the 
question  of  chastity  in  particular.  If  we  take  men  in 
the  most  diverse  positions  that  they  can  occupy,  from 
innocent  childhood  to  marriage  without  self-restraint, 
the  teaching  of  Jesus  and  the  ideal  it  holds  up  will 
afford  clear  and  definite  guidance  as  to  what  should  and 
what  should  not  be  done  at  each  stage. 

1  What  should  a  pure  lad  or  maid  do  ?' 

Keep  themselves  pure  and  free  from  snares  ;  and, 
in  order  to  be  able  to  give  all  their  strength  to  the 
service  of  God  and  man,  strive  after  greater  and  greater 
purity  of  thought  and  desire. 

'  What  should  a  youth  or  a  maid  do  who  has  fallen 
into  temptation,,  is  absorbed  by  vague  desire,  or  by  love 
of  some  particular  person,  and  who  has  thereby  lost 
to  some  extent  the  power  to  serve  God  and  man  r 

Again  the  same  thing.  Not  allow  themselves  to  fall 
(knowing  that  a  fall  will  not  free  them  from  temptation, 
but  will  only  render  it  stronger)  ;  but  go  on  striving 
ever  towards  greater  and  greater  purity,  to  be  able 
more  fullv  to  serve  God  and  man. 


50  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

'  What  should  those  do  who  have  not  been  equal  to 
the  struggle  and  have  fallen  f 

They  must  look  on  their  fall,  not  as  on  a  legitimate 
enjoyment  (as  is  now  done  when  it  is  sanctioned  by  a 
wedding  service),  nor  as  a  casual  pleasure  which  may 
be  repeated  with  someone  else,  nor  as  a  calamity,  when 
the  fall  has  been  with  an  inferior  and  without  ritual  ; 
but  they  must  look  on  this  first  fall  as  the  only  one, 
and  regard  it  as  the  entrance  to  an  actual  indissoluble 
marriage. 

This  marriage,  by  the  results  that  follow  from  it — 
the  birth  of  children — restricts  the  married  couple  to  a 
new  and  more  limited  field  of  service  of  God  and  man. 
Before  marriage  they  could  serve  God  and  man  directly 
and  in  most  varied  ways ;  but  marriage  limits  their 
sphere  of  activity,  and  demands  from  them  the  rearing 
and  education  of  children,  who  may  be  future  servants 
of  God  and  man. 

'What  must  a  married  man  and  woman  do,  who, 
by  rearing  and  educating  children,  are  fulfilling  the 
limited  service  of  God  and  man  which  corresponds  to 
their  position  ?' 

Again  the  same  thing.  Together  strive  to  free  them- 
selves' from  temptation,  purify  themselves,  and  cease 
from  sin,  by  substituting  for  physical  love,  which 
hinders  both  public  and  private  service  of  God  and 
man,  the  pure  relationship  of  brother  and  sister. 

And,  therefore,  it  is  not  true  that  we  cannot  guide 
ourselves  by  the  ideal  of  Jesus,  because  it  is  so  high,  so 
perfect,  and  so  inaccessible.  If  we  cannot  guide  our- 
selves by  it,  that  is  only  because  we  lie  to  ourselves  and 
deceive  ourselves.  For  if  we  say  we  require  a  rule 
more  accessible  than  Christ's  ideal,  or,  falling  short  of 
Christ's  ideal,  we  shall  become  dissolute — what  we  say 
really  amounts  to  this :  not  that  Christ's  ideal  is  too 
high  for  us,  but  that  we  do  not  believe  in  it  and  do 
not  wish  to  appraise  our  conduct  by  it. 

To  say  that  when  once  we  have  fallen  we  shall  have 
begun  a  loose  life,  is  really  to  say  that  we  decide  in 
advance  that  a  fall  with  an  inferior  is  not  a  sin,  but  is 


AN  AFTERWORD  51 

an  amusement,  an  infatuation,  which  we  are  not  bound 
to  rectify  by  the  permanent  union  called  marriage. 
Whereas,  if  "we  realized  that  a  fall  is  a  sin  which  should 
and  must  be  redeemed  by  an  inviolate  marriage,  and 
by  all  the  activity  involved  in  educating  the  children 
born  of  marriage — then  the  fall  would  by  no  means  be 
a  reason  for  taking  to  vice. 

It  is  as  if  a  husbandman  learning  to  sow  corn  did 
not  reckon  as  sown  any  field  in  which  the  sowing  was 
unsuccessful,  but  went  on  sowing  a  second  and  a  third 
field,  and  took  into  account  only  the  one  that  succeeded. 
Evidently  such  a  man  would  waste  much  land  and 
much  seed,  and  would  not  learn  to  sow  properly. 

Only  acknowledge  chastity  as  the  ideal,  and  regard 
every  fall  (of  whomsoever  with  whomsoever)  as  the  one 
irrevocable  life-long  marriage,  and  it  will  be  clear  that 
the  guidance  given  by  Jesus  is  sufficient,  and,  more 
than  that,  is  the  only  possible  guidance. 

*  Man  is  weak,  and  his  task  must  accord  with  his 
strength,'  is  what  people  say.  But  that  is  as  if  one 
said  :  e  My  hand  is  weak,  and  1  cannot  draw  a  line  that 
shall  be  quite  straight  (the  shortest  between  two  points), 
so,  to  help  matters,  I  will  take  as  my  model  a  crooked 
or  broken  line. '  In  reality,  the  weaker  my  hand,  the 
more  I  need  a  perfect  model. 

Having  once  recognised  the  Christian  teaching  of  the 
ideal,  we  cannot  act  as  if  we  were  ignorant  of  it,  and 
replace  it  by  external  rules.  The  Christian  teaching  of 
the  ideal  has  been  set  before  us  just  because  it  can 
guide  us  in  our  present  stage  of  progress.  Humanity 
has  already  outgrown  the  stage  of  religious,  external 
ordinances,  and  people  believe  in  them  no  more. 

Christ's  teaching  of  the  ideal  is  the  one  teaching 
that  can  guide  mankind.  We  must  not  and  cannot 
replace  the  ideal  of  Jesus  by  external  regulations  ;  but 
we  must  firmly  keep  that  ideal  before  us  in  all  its 
purity,  and,  above  all,  we  must  believe  in  it. 

To  the  sailor  while  he  kept  near  the  coast  one  could 
say  :  '  Steer  by  that  cliff,  that  cape,  or  that  tower ' ;  but 
a  time  has  come  when   the   sailor  has   left  the  land 

d  2 


52  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

behind,  and  his  only  guide  can  and  must  be  the 
unattainable  stars,  and  the  compass  showing  a  direc- 
tion. 

And  the  one  and  the  other  are  given  us. 

[September  26,  o.s.,  1890. 

The  above  is  a  new  translation,  in  preparing  which  I 
have  been  allowed  to  make  free  use  of  one  that  appeared 
in  the  New  Age  in  1897. 


IV 
THE  FIRST  STEP 


If  a  man  is  not  making  a  pretence  of  work,  but  is  work- 
ing in  order  to  accomplish  the  matter  he  has  in  hand, 
his  actions  will  necessarily  follow  one  another  in  a 
certain  sequence  determined  by  the  nature  of  the  work. 
If  he  postpones  to  a  later  time  what  from  the  nature  of 
the  work  should  be  done  first,  or  if  he  altogether  omits 
some  essential  part,  he  is  certainly  not  working  seriously, 
but  only  pretending.  This  rule  holds  unalterably  true 
whether  the  work  be  physical  or  not.  As  one  cannot 
seriously  wish  to  bake  bread  unless  one  first  kneads 
the  flour  and  then  heats  the  brick-oven,  sweeps  out 
the  ashes,  and  so  on,  so  also  one  cannot  seriously 
wish  to  lead  a  good  life  without  adopting  a  certain 
order  of  succession  in  the  attainment  of  the  necessary 
qualities. 

With  reference  to  right  living  this  rule  is  especially 
important ;  for  whereas  in  the  case  of  physical  work, 
such  as  making  bread,  it  is  easy  to  discover  by  the 
result  whether  a  man  is  seriously  engaged  in  work  or  is 
only  pretending,  with  reference  to  goodness  of  life  no 
such  verification  is  possible.  If  people,  without  knead- 
ing the  dough  or  heating  the  oven,  only  pretend  to 
make  bread — as  they  do  in  the  theatre — then  from  the 
result  (the  absence  of  bread)  it  becomes  evident  that 
they  were  only  pretending  ;  but  when  a  man  pretends 
to  be  leading  a  good  life  we  have  no  such  direct  indica- 
tions that  he  is  not  striving  seriously  but  only  pretend- 
[53] 


54  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

ing,  for  not  only  are  the  results  of  a  good  life  not  always 
evident  and  palpable  to  those  around,  but  very  often 
such  results  even  appear  to  them  harmful.  Respect  for 
a  man's  activity,  and  the  acknowledgment  of  its  utility 
and  pleasantness  by  his  contemporaries,  furnish  no 
proof  of  the  real  goodness  of  his  life. 

Therefore,  to  distinguish  the  reality  from  the  mere 
appearance  of  a  good  life,  the  indication  given  by  a 
regular  order  of  succession  in  the  acquirement  of  the 
essential  qualities  is  especially  valuable.  And  this 
indication  is  valuable,  not  so  much  to  enable  us  to  dis- 
cover the  seriousness  of  other  men's  strivings  after 
goodness  as  to  test  this  sincerity  in  ourselves,  for  in 
this  respect  we  are  liable  to  deceive  ourselves  even  more 
than  we  deceive  others. 

A  correct  order  of  succession  in  the  attainment  of 
virtues  is  an  indispensable  condition  of  advance  towards 
a  good  life,  and  consequently  the  teachers  of  mankind 
have  always  prescribed  a  certain  invariable  order  for 
their  attainment. 

All  moral  teachings  set  up  that  ladder  which,  as  the 
Chinese  wisdom  has  it,  reaches  from  earth  to  heaven, 
and  the  ascent  of  which  can  only  be  accomplished  by 
starting  from  the  lowest  step.  As  in  the  teaching  of 
the  Brahmins,  Buddhists,  Confucians,  so  also  in  the 
teaching  of  the  Greek  sages,  steps  were  fixed,  and  a 
superior  step  could  not  be  attained  without  the  lower 
one  having  been  previously  taken.  All  the  moral 
teachers  of  mankind,  religious  and  non-religious  alike, 
have  admitted  the  necessity  of  a  definite  order  of  suc- 
cession in  the  attainment  of  the  qualities  essential  to 
a  righteous  life.  The  necessity  for  this  sequence  lies 
in  the  very  essence  of  things,  and  therefore,  it  would 
seem,  ought  to  be  recognised  by  everyone. 

But,  strange  to  say,  from  the  time  Church-Christ- 
ianity spread  widely,  the  consciousness  of  this  neces- 
sary order  appears  to  have  been  more  and  more  lost, 
and  is  now  retained  only  among  ascetics  and  monks. 
Among  worldly  Christians  it  is  taken  for  granted  that; 
the  higher  virtues  may  be  attained  not  only  in  the 


THE  FIRST  STEP  55 

absence  of  the  lower  ones,  which  are  a  necessary  condi- 
tion of  the  higher,  but  even  in  company  with  the 
greatest  vices  ;  and  consequently  the  very  conception 
of  what  it  is  that  constitutes  a  good  life,  has  reached,  in 
the  minds  of  the  majority  of  worldly  people  to-day,  a 
state  of  the  greatest  confusion. 


Tn  our  times  people  have  quite  lost  the  consciousness 
of  the  necessity  of  a  sequence  in  the  qualities  a  man 
must  have  to  enable  him  to  live  a  good  life,  and,  as  a 
consequence,  they  have  lost  the  very  conception  of  what 
constitutes  a  good  life.  This,  it  seems  to  me,  has  come 
about  In  the  following  way. 

When  Christianity  replaced  heathenism  it  put  forth 
moral  demands  superior  to  the  heathen  ones,  and  at  the 
same  time  (as  was  also  the  case  with  heathen  morality) 
it  necessarily  laid  down  one  indispensable  order  for  the 
attainment  of  virtues — certain  steps  to  the  attainment 
of  a  righteous  life. 

Plato's  virtues,  beginning  with  self-control,  advanced 
through  courage  and  wisdom  to  justice ;  the  Christ- 
ian virtues,  commencing  with  self-renunciation,  rise 
through  devotion  to  the  will  of  God,  to  love. 

Those  who  accepted  Christianity  seriously  and  strove 
to  live  righteous  Christian  lives,  thus  understood 
Christianity,  and  always  began  living  rightly  by  re- 
nouncing their  lusts  ;  which  renunciation  included  the 
self-control  of  the  pagans. 

But  let  it  not  be  supposed  that  Christianity  in  this 
matter  was  only  echoing  the  teachings  of  paganism  ; 
let  me  not  be  accused  of  degrading  Christianity  from 
its  lofty  place  to  the  level  of  heathenism.  Such  an 
accusation  would  be  unjust,  for  I  regard  the  Christian 
teaching  as  the  highest  the  world  has  known,  and  as 
quite  different  from  heathenism.  Christian  teaching 
replaced  pagan  teaching  simply  because  the  former  was 
different  from,  and  superior  to,  the  latter.  But  both 
Christian  and  pagan  teaching  alike,  lead  men  toward 


m  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

truth  and  goodness  ;  and  as  these  are  always  the  same, 
the  way  to  them  must  also  be  the  same,  and  the  first 
steps  on  this  way  must  inevitably  be  the  same  for 
Christian  as  for  heathen. 

The  difference  between  the  Christian  and  pagan 
teaching  of  goodness  lies  in  this  :  that  the  heathen 
teaching  is  one  of  final  perfection,  while  the  Christian 
is  one  of  infinite  perfecting.  Every  heathen,  non- 
Christian,  teaching  sets  before  men  a  model  of  final 
perfection  ;  but  the  Christian  teaching  sets  before  them 
a  model  of  infinite  perfection.  Plato,  for  instance, 
makes  justice  the  model  of  perfection,  whereas  Christ's 
model  is  the  infinite  perfection  of  love.  '  Be  ye  perfect, 
even  as  your  Father  in  heaven  is  perfect.'  In  this  lies 
the  difference,  and  from  this  results  the  different  rela- 
tion of  pagan  and  Christian  teaching  toward  different 
grades  of  virtue.  According  to  the  former,  the  attain- 
ment of  the  highest  virtue  was  possible,  and  each  step 
toward  this  attainment  had  its  comparative  merit — the 
higher  the  step  the  greater  the  merit ;  so  that  from  the 
pagan  point  of  view  men  may  be  divided  into  moral  and 
immoral,  into  more  or  less  immoral — whereas,  accord- 
ing to  the  Christian  teaching,  which  sets  up  the  ideal 
of  infinite  perfection,  this  division  is  impossible.  There 
can  be  neither  higher  nor  lower  grades.  In  the 
Christian  teaching,  which  shows  the  infinity  of  perfec- 
tion, all  steps  are  equal  in  relation  to  the  infinite 
ideal. 

Among  the  heathens  the  plane  of  virtue  attained  by  a 
man* constituted  his  merit;  in  Christianity  merit  con- 
sists only  in  the  process  of  attaining,  in  the  greater  or 
lesser  speed  of  attainment.  From  the  heathen  point  of 
view,  a  man  who  possessed  the  virtue  of  reasonableness 
stood  morally  higher  than  one  deficient  in  that  virtue  ; 
a  man  who,  in  addition  to  reasonableness,  possessed 
courage  stood  higher  still ;  a  man  who  to  reasonableness 
and  courage  added  justice  stood  yet  higher.  But  one 
Christian  cannot  be  regarded  as  morally  either  higher 
or  lower  than  another.  A  man  is  more  or  less  of  a 
Christian  only  in  proportion  to  the  speed  with  which  he 


THE  FIRST  STEP  57 

advances  towards  infinite  perfection,  irrespective  of  the 
stage  he  may  have  reached  at  a  given  moment.  Hence 
the  stationary  righteousness  of  the  Pharisee  was  worth 
less  than  the  progress  of  the- repentant  thief  on  the 
cross. 

Such  is  the  difference  between  the  Christian  and  the 
heathen  teachings.  Consequently  the  stages  of  virtue, 
as,  for  instance,  self-control  and  courage,  which  in 
paganism  constitute  merit,  constitute  none  whatever  in 
Christianity.  In  this  respect  the  teachings  differ.  But 
with  regard  to  the  fact  that  there  can  be  no  advance 
toward  virtue,  toward  perfection,  except  by  mounting 
the  lowest  steps,  paganism  and  Christianity  are  alike  : 
here  there  can  be  no  difference. 

The  Christian,  like  the  heathen,  must  commence  the 
work  of  perfecting  himself  from  the  beginning — i.e.,  at 
the  step  at  which  the  heathen  begins  it,  namely,  self- 
control  ;  just  as  a  man  who  wishes  to  ascend  a  flight  of 
stairs  cannot  avoid  beginning  at  the  first  step.  The 
only  difference  is  that  for  the  pagan,  self-control  itself 
constitutes  a  virtue  ;  whereas  for  the  Christian,  it  is 
only  part  of  that  self-abnegation  which  is  itself  but  an 
indispensable  condition  of  all  aspiration  after  perfection. 
Therefore  the  manifestation  of  true  Christianity  could 
not  but  follow  the  same  path  that  had  been  indicated 
and  followed  by  paganism. 

But  not  all  men  have  understood  Christianity  as 
an  aspiration  towards  the  perfection  of  the  heavenly 
Father.  The  majority  of  people  have  regarded  it  as  a 
teaching  about  salvation — i.e.,  deliverance  from  sin  by 
grace  transmitted  through  the  Church,  according  to 
Catholics  and  Greek  Orthodox  ;  by  faith  in  the  Re- 
demption, according  to  Protestants,  the  Reformed 
Church,  and  Calvinists  ;  or,  according  to  some,  by  means 
of  the  two  combined. 

And  it  is  precisely  this  teaching  that  has  destroyed 
the  sincerity  and  seriousness  of  men's  relation  to  the 
moral  teaching  of  Christianity.  However  much  the 
representatives  of  these  faiths  may  preach  that  these 
means  of  salvation  do  not  hinder  man  in  his  aspiration 


.58  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

after  a  righteous  life,  but  on  the  contrary  contribute 
toward  it — still,  from  certain  assertions  certain  deduc- 
tions necessarily  follow,  and  no  arguments  can  prevent 
men  from  making  these  deductions,  when  once  they 
have  accepted  the  assertions  from  which  they  flow.  If 
a  man  believe  that  he  can  be  saved  through  grace  trans- 
mitted by  the  Church,  or  through  the  sacrifice  of  the 
Redemption,  it  is  natural  for  him  to  think  that  efforts 
of  his  own  to  live  a  right  life  are  unnecessary — the 
more  so  when  he  is  told  that  even  the  hope  that  his 
efforts  will  make  him  better  is  a  sin.  Consequently  a 
man  who  believes  that  there  are  means  other  than  per- 
sonal effort  by  which  he  may  escape  sin  or  its  results, 
cannot  strive  with  the  same  energy  and  seriousness  as 
the  man  who  knows  no  other  means.  And  not  striving 
with  perfect  seriousness,  and  knowing  of  other  means 
besides  personal  effort,  a  man  will  inevitably  neglect 
the  unalterable  order  of  succession  for  the  attainment 
of  the  good  qualities  necessary  to  a  good  life.  And 
this  has  happened  with  the  majority  of  those  who 
profess  Christianity. 


The  doctrine  that  personal  effort  is  not  necessary 
for  the  attainment  of  spiritual  perfection  by  man,  but 
that  there  are  other  means  for  its  acquirement,  caused  a 
relaxation  of  efforts  to  live  a  good  life  and  a  neglect  of 
the  consecutiveness  indispensable  for  such  a  life. 

The  great  mass  of  those  who  accepted  Christianity, 
accepting  it  only  externally,  took  advantage  of  the  sub- 
stitution of  Christianity  for  paganism  to  rid  themselves 
of  the  demands  of  the  heathen  virtues — no  longer  neces- 
sary for  a  Christian — and  to  free  themselves  from  all 
conflict  with  their  animal  nature. 

The  same  thing  happens  with  those  who  cease  to 
believe  in  the  teaching  of  the  Church.  They  are  like 
the  before-mentioned  believers,  only  they  put  forward 
— instead  of  grace,  bestowed  by  the  Church  or  through 
Redemption — some  imaginary  good  work,  approved  of 


THE  FIRST  STEP  59 

by  the  majority  of  men,  such  as  the  service  of  science, 
art,  or  humanity  ;  and  in  the  name  of  this  imaginary 
good  work  they  liberate  themselves  from  the  consecu- 
tive attainment  of  the  qualities  necessary  for  a  good 
life,  and  are  satisfied,  like  men  on  the  stage,  with  pre- 
tending to  live  a  good  life. 

Those  who  fell  away  from  paganism  without  embrac- 
ing Christianity  in  its  true  significance,  began  to  preach 
love  for  God  and  man  apart  from  self-renunciation, 
and  justice  without  self-control ;  that  is  to  say,  they 
preached  the  higher  virtues  omitting  the  lower  ones  : 
i.e.,  not  the  virtues  themselves,  but  the  semblance. 

Some  preach  love  to  God  and  man  without  self- 
renunciation,  and  others  humaneness,  the  service  of 
humanity,  without  self-control.  And  as  this  teaching, 
while  pretending  to  introduce  man  into  higher  moral 
regions,  encourages  his  animal  nature  by  liberating 
him  from  the  most  elementary  demands  of  morality 
— long  ago  acknowledged  by  the  heathens,  and  not 
only  not  rejected  but  strengthened  by  true  Christ- 
ianity— it  was  readily  accepted  both  by  believers  and 
unbelievers. 

Only  the  other  day  the  Pope's  Encyclical*  on 
Socialism  was  published,  in  which,  after  a  pretended 
refutation  of  the  Socialist  view  of  the  wrongfulness  of 
private  property,  it  was  plainly  said  :  '  No  one  is  com- 
manded to  distribute  to  others  that  which  is  required  for 
his  own  necessities  and  those  of  his  household  ;  nor  even  to 
give  away  what  is  reasonably  required  to  keep  up  becom- 
ingly his  condition  in  life ;  for  no  one  ought  to  live 
unbecomingly.1  (This  is  from  St.  Thomas  Aquinas,  who 
says,  Nullus  enim  inconvenienter  vivere  debet. )  l  But 
when  necessity  has  been  fairly  supplied,  and  one's  position 
fairly  considered,  it  is  a  duty  to  give  to  the  indigent  out  of 
that  which  is  over.     That  which  remaineth  give  alms.' 

Thus  now  preaches  the  head  of  the  most  wide-spread 
Church.     Thus  have  preached  all  the  Church  teachers, 

*  This  refers  to  the  Encyclical  of  Pope  Leo  XIII.  In  the 
passage  quoted  the  official"  English  translation  of  the  Ency- 
clical has  been  followed.     See  the  Tablet,  1891. 


60  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

who  considered  salvation  by  works  as  insufficient.  And 
together  with  this  teaching  of  selfishness,  which  pre- 
scribes that  you  shall  give  to  your  neighbours  only 
what  you  do  not  want  yourself,  they  preach  love,  and 
recall  with  pathos  the  celebrated  words  of  Paul  in  the 
thirteenth  chapter  of  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corin- 
thians, about  love. 

Notwithstanding  that  the  Gospels  overflow  with 
demands  for  self-renunciation,  with  indications  that 
self-renunciation  is  the  first  condition  of  Christian  per- 
fection ;  notwithstanding  such  clear  expressions  as  : 
e  Whosoever  will  not  take  up  his  cross  .  •  .'  '  Whoso- 
ever hath  not  forsaken  father  and  mother  .  .  .'  'Who- 
soever shall  lose  his  life  .  .  .' — people  assure  themselves 
and  others  that  it  is  possible  to  love  men  without 
renouncing  that  to  which  one  is  accustomed,  or  even 
what  one  pleases  to  consider  becoming  for  one's  self. 

So  speak  the  Church  people  ;  and  those  who  reject 
not  only  the  Church  but  also  the  Christian  teaching 
(Freethinkers)  think,  speak,  write,  and  act,  in  just  the 
same  way.  These  men  assure  themselves  and  others 
that  without  in  the  least  diminishing  their  needs,  with- 
out (Overcoming  their  lusts,  they  can  serve  mankind 
— i.e.,  lead  a  good  life. 

Men  have  thrown  aside  the  heathen  sequence  of 
virtues ;  but,  not  assimilating  the  Christian  teaching  in 
its  true  significance,  they  have  not  accepted  the  Christian 
sequence,  and  are  left  quite  without  guidance. 


In  olden  times,  when  there  was  no  Christian  teach- 
ing, all  the  teachers  of  life,  beginning  with  Socrates, 
regarded  as  the  first  virtue  of  life,  self-control — iyKpdreca 
or  <rio<f>po<r\jvr} ;  and  it  was  understood  that  every  virtue 
must  begin  with  and  pass  through  this  one.  It  was 
clear  that  a  man  who  had  no  self-control,  who  had 
developed  an  immense  number  of  desires  and  had 
yielded  himself  up  to  them,  could  not  lead  a  good  life. 
It  was  evident  that  before  a  man  could  even  think  of 


THE  FIRST  STEP  61 

disinterestedness,  justice— to  say  nothing-  of  generosity 
or  love — he  must  learn  to  exercise  control  over  himself. 
According  to  our  ideas  now,  nothing  of  the  sort  is 
necessary.  We  are  convinced  that  a  man  who  has 
developed  his  desires  to  the  climax  reached  in  our 
society,  a  man  who  cannot  live  without  satisfying  the 
hundred  unnecessary  habits  that  enslave  him,  can  yet 
lead  an  altogether  moral  and  good  life.  Looked  at 
from  any  point  of  view :  the  lowest,  utilitarian  ;  the 
higher,  pagan,  which  demands  justice  ;  but  especially 
from  the  highest,  Christian,  which  demands  love — it 
should  surely  be  clear  to  every  one  that  a  man  who 
uses  for  his  own  pleasure  (which  he  might  easily 
forego)  the  labour,  often  the  painful  labour,  of  others, 
behaves  wrongly  ;  and  that  this  is  the  very  first  wrong 
he  must  cease  to  commit  if  he  wishes  to  live  a  good  life. 

From  the  utilitarian  point  of  view  such  conduct  is 
bad,  because  as  long  as  he  forces  others  to  work  for 
him  a  man  is  always  in  an  unstable  position  ;  he 
accustoms  himself  to  the  satisfaction  of  his  desires  and 
becomes  enslaved  by  them,  while  those  who  work  for 
him  do  so  with  hatred  and  envy,  and  only  await  an 
opportunity  to  free  themselves  from  the  necessity  of 
so  working.  Consequently  such  a  man  is  always  in 
danger  of  being  left  with  deeply  rooted  habits  which 
create  demands  he  cannot  satisfy. 

From  the  point  of  view  of  justice  such  conduct  is 
bad,  because  it  is  not  well  to  employ  for  one's  own 
pleasure  the  labour  of  other  men  who  themselves 
cannot  afford  a  hundredth  part  of  the  pleasures  enjoyed 
by  him  for  whom  they  labour. 

From  the  point  of  view  of  Christian  love  it  can 
hardly  be  necessary  to  prove  that  a  man  who  loves 
others  will  give  them  his  own  labour  rather  than  take 
from  them,  for  his  own  pleasure,  the  fruit  of  their  labour. 

But  these  demands  of  utility,  justice,  and  love,  are 
altogether  ignored  by  our  modern  society.  With  us 
the  effort  to  limit  one's  desires  is  regarded  as  neither 
the  first,  nor  even  the  last,  but  as  an  altogether  un- 
necessary, condition  of  a  good  life. 


62  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

On  the  contrary,  according"  to  the  prevailing  and 
most  widely  spread  teaching  of  life  to-day,  the  augmen- 
tation of  one's  wants  is  regarded  as  a  desirable  condi- 
tion ;  as  a  sign  of  development,  civilization,  culture,  and 
perfection.  So-called  educated  people  regard  habits 
of  comfort,  that  is,  of  effeminacy,  as  not  only  harmless, 
but  even  good,  indicating  a  certain  moral  elevation — as 
almost  a  virtue. 

It  is  thought  that  the  more  the  wants,  and  the  more 
refined  these  wants,  the  better. 

Nothing  shows  this  more  clearly  than  the  descriptive 
poetry,  and  especially  the  novels,  of  the  last  two 
centuries. 

How  are  the  heroes  and  heroines  who  represent  the 
ideals  of  virtue  portrayed  ? 

In  most  cases  the  men  who  are  meant  to  represent 
something  noble  and  lofty — from  Childe  Harold  down 
to  the  latest  heroes  of  Feuillet,  Trollope,  or  Maupassant 
— are  simply  depraved  sluggards,  consuming  in  luxury 
the  labour  of  thousands,  and  themselves  doing  nothing 
useful  for  anybody.  The  heroines  are  the  mistresses 
who  in  one  way  or  another  afford  more  or  less  delight 
to  these  men,  are  as  idle  as  they,  and  are  equally  ready 
to  cofnsume  the  labour  of  others  by  their  luxury. 

I  do  not  refer  to  the  representations  of  really 
abstemious  and  industrious  people  one  occasionally 
meets  with  in  literature.  I  am  speaking  of  the  usual 
type  that  serves  as  an  ideal  to  the  masses :  of  the 
character  that  the  majority  of  men  and  women  are 
trying  to  resemble.  1  remember  the  difficulty  (in- 
explicable to  me  at  the  time)  that  I  experienced  when 
I  wrote  novels,  a  difficulty  with  which  1  contended  and 
with  which  I  know  all  novelists  now  contend  who  have 
even  the  dimmest  conception  of  what  constitutes  real 
moral  beauty — the  difficulty  of  portraying  ■  typo  taken 
from  the  upper  classes  as  ideally  good  and  kind,  and  at 
the  same  time  true  to  life.  To  be  true  to  life,  a 
description  of  a  man  or  woman  of  the  upper,  educated 
classes  must  show  him  in  his  usual  surroundings— that 
is,  in  luxury,  physical  idleness,  and  demand  tag  much. 


THE  FIRST  STEP  63 

From  a  moral  point  of  view  such  a  person  is  un- 
doubtedly objectionable.  But  it  is  necessary  to 
represent  this  person  in  such  a  way  that  he  may  appear 
attractive.  And  novelists  try  so  to  represent  him.  I 
also  tried.  And,  strange  to  say,  such  a  representation, 
making  an  immoral  fornicator  and  murderer  (duellist  or 
soldier),  an  utterly  useless,  idly  drifting,  fashionable 
buffoon,  appear  attractive,  does  not  require  much  art 
or  effort.  The  readers  of  novels  are,  for  the  most 
part,  exactly  such  men,  and  therefore  readily  believe 
that  these  Childe  Harolds,  One'gins,  Monsieurs  de 
Camors,*  etc.,  are  very  excellent  people. 


Clear  proof  that  the  men  of  our  time  really  do  not 
admit  pagan  self-control  and  Christian  self-renuncia- 
tion to  be  good  and  desirable  qualities,  but,  on  the 
contrary,  regard  the  augmentation  of  wants  as  good 
and  elevated,  is  to  be  found  in  the  education  given  to 
the  vast  majority  of  children  in  our  society.  Not  only 
are  they  not  trained  to  self-control,  as  among  the 
pagans,  or  to  the  self-renunciation  proper  to  Christians, 
but  they  are  deliberately  inoculated  with  habits  of 
effeminacy,  physical  idleness,  and  luxury. 

I  have  long  wished  to  write  a  fairy-tale  of  this  kind  : 
A  woman,  wishing  to  revenge  herself  on  one  who  has 
injured  her,  carries  off  her  enemy^s  child,  and,  going  to 
a  sorcerer,  asks  him  to  teach  her  how  she  can  most 
cruelly  wreak  her  vengeance  on  the  stolen  infant,  the 
only  child  of  her  enemy.  The  sorcerer  bids  her  carry 
the  child  to  a  place  he  indicates,  and  assures  her  that  a 
most  terrible  vengeance  will  result.  The  wicked  woman 
follows  his  advice  ;  but,  keeping  an  eye  upon  the  child, 
is  astonished  to  see  that  it  is  found  and  adopted  by  a 
wealthy,  childless  man.     She  goes  to  the  sorcerer  and 

*  Onegin  is  the  hero  of  a  Russian  poem  by  Poushkin. 
M.  de  Caniors  is  the  hero  of  a  French  novel  by  Octave 
Feuillet. 


64  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

reproaches  him,  but  he  bids  her  wait.  The  child  grows 
up  in  luxury  and  effeminacy.  The  woman  is  perplexed, 
but  again  the  sorcerer  bids  her  wait.  And  at  length 
the  time  comes  when  the  wicked  woman  is  not  only 
satisfied,  but  has  even  to  pity  her  victim.  He  grows  up 
in  the  effeminacy  and  dissoluteness  of  wealth,  and 
owing  to  his  good  nature  is  ruined.  Then  begins  a 
sequence  of  physical  sufferings,  poverty,  and  humilia- 
tion, to  which  he  is  especially  sensitive  and  against 
which  he  knows  not  how  to  contend.  Aspirations 
toward  a  moral  life — and  the  weakness  of  his  effemi- 
nate body  accustomed  to  luxury  and  idleness ;  vain 
struggles  ;  lower  and  still  lower  decline ;  drunkenness 
to  drown  thought,  then  crime  and  insanity  or  suicide. 

And,  indeed,  one  cannot  regard  without  terror  the 
education  of  the  children  of  the  wealthy  class  in  our 
day.  Only  the  cruellest  foe  could,  one  would  think, 
inoculate  a  child  with  those  defects  and  vices  which  are 
now  instilled  into  him  by  his  parents,  especially  by 
mothers.  One  is  awestruck  at  the  sight,  and  still 
more  at  the  results  of  this,  if  only  one  knows  how  to 
discern  what  is  taking  place  in  the  souls  of  the  best  of 
these f  children,  so  carefully  ruined  by  their  parents. 
Habits  of  effeminacy  are  instilled  into  them  at  a  time 
when  they  do  not  yet  understand  their  moral  signifi- 
cance. Not  only  is  the  habit  of  temperance  and  self- 
control  neglected,  but,  contrary  to  the  educational 
practice  of  Sparta  and  of  the  ancient  world  in  general, 
this  quality  is  altogether  atrophied.  Not  only  is  man 
not  trained  to  work,  and  to  all  the  qualities  essential  to 
fruitful  labour — concentration  of  mind,  strenuousness, 
endurance,  enthusiasm  for  work,  ability  to  repair  what 
is  spoiled,  familiarity  with  fatigue,  joy  in  attainment — 
but  he  is  habituated  to  idleness,  and  to  contempt  for  all 
the  products  of  labour  :  is  taught  to  spoil,  throw  away, 
and  again  procure  for  money  Anything  he  fancies, 
without  a  thought  of  how  things  are  made.  Man  is 
deprived  of  the  power  of  acquiring  the  primary  virtue 
of  reasonableness,  indispensable  for  the  attainment  of 
all  the  others,  and  is  let  loose  in  a  world  where  people 


THE  FIRST  STEP  65 

preach,  and  praise,  the  lofty  virtues  of  justice,  the 
service  of  man,  and  love. 

It  is  well  if  the  youth  he  endowed  with  a  morally 
feehle  and  ohtuse  nature,  which  does  not  detect  the 
difference  between  make-believe  and  genuine  goodness 
of  life,  and  is  satisfied  with  the  prevailing  mutual 
deception.  If  this  be  the  case  all  goes  apparently  well, 
and  such  a  man  will  sometimes  quietly  live  on  with  his 
moral  consciousness  unawakened  till  death. 

But  it  is  not  always  thus,  especially  of  late,  now  that 
the  consciousness  of  the  immorality  of  such  life  fills  the 
air,  and  penetrates  the  heart  unsought.  Frequently, 
and  ever  more  frequently,  it  happens  that  there 
awakens  a  demand  for  real,  unfeigned  morality ;  and 
then  begin  a  painful  inner  struggle  and  suffering  which 
end  but  rarely  in  the  triumph  of  the  moral  sentiment. 

A  man  feels  that  his  life  is  bad,  that  he  must  reform 
it  from  the  very  roots,  and  he  tries  to  do  so  ;  but  he  is 
then  attacked  on  all  sides  by  those  who  have  passed 
through  a  similar  struggle  and  have  been  vanquished. 
They  endeavour  by  every  means  to  convince  him  that 
this  reform  is  quite  unnecessary :  that  goodness  does 
not  at  all  depend  upon  self-control  and  self-renuncia- 
tion, that  it  is  possible,  while  addicting  himself  to 
gluttony,  personal  adornment,  physical  idleness,  and 
even  fornication,  to  be  a  perfectly  good  and  useful  man. 
And  the  struggle,  inmost  cases,  terminates  lamentably. 
Either  the  man,  overcome  by  his  weakness,  yields  to 
the  general  opinion,  stifles  the  voice  of  conscience, 
distorts  his  reason  to  justify  himself,  and  continues  to 
lead  the  old  dissipated  life,  assuring  himself  that  it  is 
redeemed  by  faith  in  the  Redemption  or  the  Sacra- 
ments, or  by  service  to  science,  to  the  State,  or  to  art ; 
or  else  he  struggles,  suffers,  and  finally  becomes  insane 
or  shoots  himself. 

It  seldom  happens,  amid  all  the  temptations  that 
surround  him,  that  a  man  of  our  society  understands 
what  was  thousands  of  years  ago,  and  still  is,  an 
elementary  truth  for  all  reasonable  people :  namely, 
that  for  the  attainment  of  a  good  life  it  is  necessary, 

E 


66  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

first  of  all,  to  cease  to  live  an  evil  life  ;  that  for  the 
attainment  of  the  higher  virtues  it  is  needful,  first 
of  all,  to  acquire  the  virtue  of  abstinence  or  self- 
control,  as  the  pagans  called  it,  or  of  self-renunciation, 
as  Christianity  has  it,  and  therefore  it  seldom  happens 
that,  by  gradual  efforts,  he  succeeds  in  attaining  this 
primary  virtue. 


ft 

I  have  just  been  reading  the  letters  of  one  of  our 
highly  educated  and  advanced  men  of  the  'forties,  the 
exile  Ogaryof,  to  another  yet  more  highly  educated 
and  gifted  man,  Herzen.  In  these  letters  Ogaryof 
gives  expression  to  his  sincere  thoughts  and  highest 
aspirations,  and  one  cannot  fail  to  see  that — as  was 
natural  to  a  young  man — he  rather  shows  off  before 
his  friend.  He  talks  of  self-perfecting,  of  sacred 
friendship,  love,  the  service  of  science,  of  humanity, 
and  the  like.  And  at  the  same  time  he  calmly  writes 
that  he  often  irritates  the  companion  of  his  life  by,  as 
he  expresses  it,  '  returning  home  in  an  unsober  state, 
or  disappearing  for  many  hours  with  a  fallen,  but  dear 
creature.   .  .  .' 

Evidently  it  never  even  occurred  to  this  remarkably 
kind-hearted,  talented,  and  well-educated  man  that 
there  was  anything  at  all  objectionable  in  the  fact  that 
he,  a  married  man,  awaiting  the  confinement  of  his  wife 
(in  his  next  letter  he  writes  that  his  wife  has  given 
birth  to  a  child),  returned  home  intoxicated,  and  dis- 
appeared with  dissolute  women.  It  did  not  enter  his 
head  that  until  he  had  commenced  the  struggle,  and 
had,  at  least  to  some  extent,  conquered  his  inclination 
to  drunkenness  and  fornication,  he  could  not  think  of 
friendship  and  love,  and  still  less  of  serving  any  one  or 
any  thing.  But  he  not  only  did  not  struggle  against 
these  vices — he  evidently  thought  there  was  something 
very  nice  in  them,  and  that  they  did  not  in  the  least 
hinder  the  struggle  for  perfection  ;  and,  therefore, 
instead  of  hiding  them  from  the  friend  in  whose  eyes 


THE  FIRST  STEP  07 

he  wishes  to  appear  in  a  good  light,  he  exhibits 
them. 

Thus  it  was  half  a  century  ago.  I  was  contemporary 
with  such  men.  I  knew  Ogaryof  and  Herzen  them- 
selves, and  others  of  that  stamp,  and  men  educated  in 
the  same  traditions.  There  was  a  remarkable  absence 
of  consistency  in  the  lives  of  all  these  men.  Together 
with  a  sincere  and  ardent  wish  for  good,  there  was  an 
utter  looseness  of  personal  desire,  which,  they  thought, 
could  not  hinder  the  living  of  a  good  life,  nor  the  per- 
formance of  good,  and  even  great,  deeds.  They  put 
unkneaded  loaves  into  a  cold  oven,  and  believed  that 
bread  would  be  baked.  And  then,  when  with  advancing 
years  they  began  to  remark  that  the  bread  did  not  bake 
— i.e.,  that  no  good  came  of  their  lives — they  saw  in  this 
something  peculiarly  tragic. 

And  the  tragedy  of  such  lives  is  indeed  terrible. 
And  this  same  tragedy  apparent  in  the  lives  of  Herzen, 
Ogaryof,  and  others  of  their  time,  exists  to-day  in  the 
lives  of  very  many  so-called  educated  people  who  hold 
the  same  views.  A  man  desires  to  lead  a  good  life,  but 
the  consecutiveness  which  is  indispensable  for  this  is 
lost  in  the  society  in  which  he  lives.  As  fifty  years 
ago  Ogaryof,  Herzen,  and  others,  so  also  the  majority 
of  men  of  the  present  day  are  persuaded  that  to  lead  an 
effeminate  life,  to  eat  sweet  and  fat  dishes,  to  delight 
one's  self  in  every  way  and  satisfy  all  one's  desires, 
does  not  hinder  one  from  living  a  good  life.  But  as  it 
is  evident  that  a  good  life  in  their  case  does  not  result, 
they  give  themselves  up  to  pessimism,  and  say,  '  Such 
is  the  tragedy  of  human  life.' 

What  is  also  strange  in  the  case  is  that  these  people 
know  that  the  distribution  of  pleasures  among  men  is 
unequal,  and  regard  this  inequality  as  an  evil,  and  wish 
to  correct  it,  yet  do  not  cease  to  strive  to  augment  their 
own  pleasures — i.e.,  to  augment  inequality  in  the  dis- 
tribution of  pleasures.  In  acting  thus,  these  people  are 
like  men  who  being  the  first  to  enter  an  orchard  hasten 
to  gather  all  the  fruit  they  can  lay  their  hands  on,  and 
vet  wish  to  organize  a  more  equal  distribution  of  the 

e  2 


68  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

fruit  of  the  orchard  between  themselves  and  later 
comers,  while  they  continue  to  pluck  all  the  fruit  they 
can  reach. 


The  delusion  that  men  while  addicting  themselves  to 
their  desires  and  regarding  this  life  of  desire  as  good, 
can  yet  lead  a  good,  useful,  just  and  loving  life,  is  so 
astonishing,  that  men  of  later  generations  will,  1  should 
think,  simply  fail  to  understand  what  the  men  of  our 
time  meant  by  the  words  c  good  life,'  when  they  said 
that  the  gluttons — the  effeminate,  lustful  sluggards — of 
our  wealthy  classes  led  good  lives.  Indeed,  one  need 
only  put  aside  for  a  moment  the  customary  view  of  the 
life  of  our  wealthy  classes,  and  look  at  it,  I  do  not  say 
from  the  Christian  point  of  view,  but  from  the  pagan 
standpoint,  from  the  standpoint  of  the  very  lowest 
demands  of  justice,  to  be  convinced  that,  living  amidst 
the  violation  of  the  plainest  laws  of  justice  or  fairness, 
such  as  even  children  in  their  games  think  it  wrong  to 
violate,  we,  men  of  the  wealthy  classes,  have  no  right 
even  to  talk  about  a  good  life. 

Any  man  of  our  society  who  would,  I  do  not  say 
begin  a  good  life,  but  even  begin  to  make  some  little 
approach  towards  it,  must  first  of  all  cease  to  lead  a  bad 
life,  must  begin  to  destroy  those  conditions  of  an  evil 
life  with  which  he  finds  himself  surrounded. 

How  often  one  hears,  as  an  excuse  for  not  reforming 
our  lives,  the  argument  that  any  act  that  is  contrary 
to  the  usual  mode  of  life  would  be  unnatural,  ludicrous 
— would  look  like  a  desire  to  show  off,  and  would 
therefore  not  be  a  good  action.  This  argument 
seems  expressly  framed  to  prevent  people  from  ever 
changing  their  evil  lives.  If  all  our  life  were  good, 
just,  kind,  then  and  only  then  would  an  action  in 
conformity  with  the  usual  mode  of  life  be  good.  If 
half  our  life  were  good  and  the  other  half  bad,  then 
there  would  be  as  much  chance  of  an  action  not  in 
conformity  with  the  usual  mode  of  life  being  good  as  of 
its  being  bad.     But  when  life  is  altogether  bad  and 


THE  FIRST  STEP  GO 

wrong,  as  is  the  case  in  our  upper  classes,  then  a  man 
cannot  perform  a  single  good  action  without  disturbing 
the  usual  current  of  life.  He  can  do  a  bad  action 
without  disturbing  this  current,  but  not  a  good  one. 

A  man  accustomed  to  the  life  of  our  well-to-do  classes 
cannot  lead  a  righteous  life  without  first  coming  out  of 
those  conditions  of  evil  in  which  he  is  immersed — he 
cannot  begin  to  do  good  until  he  has  ceased  to  do  evil. 
It  is  impossible  for  a  man  living  in  luxury  to  lead  a 
righteous  life.  All  his  efforts  after  goodness  will  be  in 
vain  until  he  changes  his  life,  until  he  performs  that 
work  which  stands  first  in  sequence  before  him.  A 
good  life  according  to  the  pagan  view,  and  still  more 
according  to  the  Christian  view,  is,  and  can  be, 
measured  in  no  other  way  than  by  the  mathematical 
relation  between  love  for  self  and  love  for  others.  The 
less  there  is  of  love  for  self  with  all  the  ensuing  care 
about  self  and  the  selfish  demands  made  upon  the 
labour  of  others,  and  the  more  there  is  of  love  for 
others,  with  the  resultant  care  for  and  labour  bestowed 
upon  others,  the  better  is  the  life. 

Thus  has  goodness  of  life  been  understood  by  all  the 
sages  of  the  world  and  by  all  true  Christians,  and  in 
exactly  the  same  way  do  all  plain  men  understand  it 
now.  The  more  a  man  gives  to  others  and  the  less  he 
demands  for  himself,  the  better  he  is  :  the  less  he  gives 
to  others  and  the  more  he  demands  for  himself,  the 
worse  he  is. 

And  not  only  does  a  man  become  morally  better  the 
more  love  he  has  for  others  and  the  less  for  himself, 
but  the  less  he  loves  himself  the  easier  it  becomes  for 
him  to  be  better,  and  contrariwise.  The  more  a  man 
loves  himself,  and,  consequently,  the  more  he  demands 
labour  from  others,  the  less  possibility  is  there  for  him 
to  love  and  to  work  for  others,  and  less  not  only  in  as 
many  times  as  his  love  for  himself  has  increased,  but 
in  some  enormously  greater  degree  less,  as  happens  if 
we  move  the  fulcrum  of  a  lever  from  the  long  end  to 
the  short  one  :  this  will  not  only  lengthen  the  long  arm, 
but  will  also  shorten  the  short  one.     So,  also,  if  a  man, 


70  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

possessing*  a  certain  faculty,  love,  augment  his  love  and 
care  for  himself,  he  will  thereby  diminish  his  power  of 
loving  and  caring  for  others,  not  only  in  proportion  to 
the  love  he  has  transferred  to  himself,  but  in  a  much 
greater  degree.  Instead  of  feeding  others  a  man  eats 
too  much  himself ;  by  so  doing  he  not  only  diminishes 
the  possibility  of  giving  away  the  surplus,  but,  by 
overeating,  he  deprives  himself  of  power  to  help 
others. 

In  order  to  love  others  in  reality  and  not  in  word 
only,  one  must  cease  to  love  one^s  self  also  in  reality 
and  not  merely  in  word.  In  most  cases  it  happens 
thus  :  we  think  we  love  others,  we  assure  ourselves  and 
others  that  it  is  so,  but  we  love  them  only  in  words, 
while  ourselves  we  love  in  reality.  Others  we  forget 
to  feed  and  put  to  bed,  ourselves — never.  Therefore, 
in  order  really  to  love  others  in  deed,  we  must  learn 
not  to  love  ourselves  in  deed,  learn  to  forget  to  feed 
ourselves  and  put  ourselves  to  bed,  exactly  as  we  forget 
to  do  these  things  for  others. 

We  say  of  a  self-indulgent  person  accustomed  to  lead 
a  luxurious  life,  that  he  is  a  e  good  man '  and  '  leads  a 
good  life.5  But  such  a  person — whether  man  or  woman 
— although  he  may  possess  the  most  amiable  traits  of 
character,  meekness,  good  nature,  etc.,  cannot  be  good 
and  lead  a  good  life,  any  more  than  a  knife  of  the  very 
best  workmanship  and  steel  can  be  sharp  and  cut  well 
unless  it  is  sharpened.  To  be  good  and  lead  a  good 
life  means  to  give  to  others  more  than  one  takes  from 
them.  But  a  self-indulgent  man  accustomed  to  a 
luxurious  life  cannot  do  this,  first  because  he  himself  is 
always  in  want  of  much  (and  this  not  on  account  of  his 
selfishness,  but  because  he  is  accustomed  to  luxury  and 
it  is  painful  for  him  to  be  deprived  of  that  to  which  he 
is  accustomed)  ;  and  secondly,  because  by  consuming 
all  that  he  receives  from  others  he  weakens  himself  ami 
renders  himself  unfit  to  labour,  and  therefore  unfit  to 
serve  others.  A  self-indulgent  man  who  sleeps  long 
upon  a  soft  bed,  eats  and  drinks  abundance  of  fat, 
sweet  food,  who  is  always  dressed  cleanly  and  suitably 


THE  FIRST  STEP  71 

to  the  temperature,  who  has  never  accustomed  himself 
to  the  effort  of  laborious  work,  can  do  very  little. 

We  are  so  accustomed  to  our  own  lies  and  the  lies  of 
others,  and  it  is  so  convenient  for  us  not  to  see  through 
the  lies  of  others,  that  they  may  not  see  through  ours, 
that  we  are  not  in  the  least  astonished  at,  and  do  not 
doubt  the  truth  of,  the  assertion  of  the  virtuousness, 
sometimes  even  the  sanctity,  of  people  who  are  leading 
a  perfectly  unrestrained  life. 

A  person,  man  or  woman,  sleeps  on  a  spring  bed 
with  two  mattresses,  and  two  smooth,  clean  sheets,  and 
feather  pillows  in  pillow-cases.  By  the  bedside  is  a 
rug,  that  the  feet  may  not  get  cold  on  stepping  out  of 
bed,  though  slippers  also  lie  near.  Here  also  are  the 
necessary  utensils,  so  that  he  need  not  leave  the  house 
— whatever  uncleanliness  he  may  produce  will  be 
carried  away  and  all  made  tidy.  The  windows  are 
covered  with  curtains  that  the  daylight  may  not 
awaken  him,  and  he  sleeps  as  long  as  he  is  inclined. 
Besides  all  this,  measures  are  taken  that  the  room  may 
be  warm  in  winter  and  cool  in  summer,  and  that  he 
may  not  be  disturbed  by  the  noise  of  flies  or  other 
insects.  While  he  sleeps,  water,  hot  and  cold,  for  his 
ablutions,  sometimes  baths  and  preparations  for  shav- 
ing, are  provided.  Tea  and  coffee  are  also  prepared, 
stimulating  drinks  to  betaken  immediately  upon  rising. 
Boots,  shoes,  galoshes — several  pairs  dirtied  the  previous 
day — are  already  being  cleaned  and  made  to  shine  like 
glass  freed  from  every  speck  of  dust.  Similarly  are 
cleaned  various  garments,  soiled  on  the  preceding  day, 
differing  in  texture  to  suit  not  only  summer  and  winter, 
but  also  spring,  autumn,  rainy,  damp,  and  warm 
weather.  Clean  linen,  washed,  starched,  and  ironed, 
is  being  made  ready  with  studs,  shirt  buttons,  button- 
holes, all  carefully  inspected  by  specially  appointed 
people. 

If  the  person  be  active  he  rises  early— at  seven 
o'clock — i.e.,  still  a  couple  of  hours  later  than  those 
who  are  making  all  these  preparations  for  him.  Besides 
clothes  for  the  day  and  covering  for  the  night,  there  is 


72  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

also  a  costume  and  foot-gear  for  the  time  of  dressing 
— dressing-gown  and  slippers  ;  and  now  he  undertakes 
his  washing,  cleaning,  brushing,  for  which  several 
kinds  of  brushes  are  used,  as  well  as  soap  and  a  great 
quantity  of  water.  (Many  English  men  and  women, 
for  some  reason  or  other,  are  specially  proud  of  using 
a  great  deal  of  soap  and  pouring  a  large  quantity  of 
water  over  themselves.)  Then  he  dresses,  brushes  his 
hair  before  a  special  kind  of  looking-glass  (different 
from  those  that  hang  in  almost  every  room  in  the 
house),  takes  the  things  he  needs,  such  as  spectacles 
or  eyeglasses,  and  then  distributes  in  different  pockets 
a  clean  pocket-handkerchief  to  blow  his  nose  on ;  a 
watch  with  a  chain,  though  in  almost  every  room  he 
goes  to  there  will  be  a  clock  ;  money  of  various  kinds, 
small  change  (often  in  a  specially  contrived  case  which 
saves  him  the  trouble  of  looking  for  the  required  coin) 
and  bank-notes  ;  also  visiting  cards  on  which  his  name 
is  printed  (saving  him  the  trouble  of  saying  or  writing 
it)  ;  pocket-book  and  pencil.  In  the  case  of  women, 
the  toilet  is  still  more  complicated  :  corsets,  arranging 
of  long  hair,  adornments,  laces,  elastics,  ribbons,  ties, 
hairpins,  pins,  brooches. 

iiutrat  last  all  is  complete  and  the  day  commences, 
generally  with  eating  :  tea  and  coffee  are  drunk  with  a 
great  quantity  of  sugar  ;  bread  made  of  the  finest  white 
flour  is  eaten  with  large  quantities  of  butter,  and  some- 
times the  flesh  of  pigs.  The  men  for  the  most  part 
smoke  cigars  or  cigarettes  meanwhile,  and  read  fresh 
papers,  which  have  just  been  brought.  Then,  leaving 
to  others  the  task  of  setting  right  the  soiled  and  dis- 
ordered room,  they  go  to  their  office  or  business,  or 
drive  in  carriages  produced  specially  to  move  such 
people  about.  Then  comes  a  luncheon  of  slain  beasts, 
birds,  and  fish,  followed  by  a  dinner  consisting,  if  it  be 
very  modest,  of  three  courses,  dessert,  and  coffee. 
Then  playing  at  cards  and  playing  music — or  the 
theatre,  reading,  and  conversation,  in  soft  spring  arm- 
chairs, by  the  intensified  and  shaded  light  of  candles, 
gas,  or  electricity.     After  this,  again  tea,  again  eating 


THE  FIRST  STEP  73 

— supper — and  again  to  bed,  shaken  up  and  prepared 
with  clean  linen,  and  with  washed  utensils  to  be  again 
made  foul. 

Thus  pass  the  days  of  a  man  of  modest  life,  of  whom, 
if  he  is  good-natured  and  does  not  possess  any  habits 
specially  obnoxious  to  those  about  him,  it  is  said  that 
he  leads  a  good  and  virtuous  life. 

But  a  good  life  is  the  life  of  a  man  who  does  good  to 
others  ;  and  can  a  man  accustomed  to  live  thus  do 
good  to  others?  Before  he  can  do  good  to  men  he 
must  cease  to  do  evil.  Reckon  up  all  the  harm  such  a 
man,  often  unconsciously,  does  to  others,  and  you  will 
see  that  he  is  far  indeed  from  doing  good ;  he  would 
have  to  perform  many  acts  of  heroism  to  redeem  the 
evil  he  commits,  but  he  is  too  much  enfeebled  by  his 
life  full  of  desires  to  perform  any  such  acts.  He  might 
sleep  with  more  advantage,  both  physical  and  moral, 
lying  on  the  floor  wrapped  in  his  cloak,  as  Marcus 
Aurelius  did ;  and  thus  he  might  save  all  the  labour 
and  trouble  involved  in  the  manufacture  of  mattresses, 
springs,  and  pillows,  as  also  the  daily  labour  of  the 
laundress — one  of  the  weaker  sex  burdened  by  the 
bearing  and  nursing  of  children — who  washes  linen  for 
this  strong  man.  By  going  to  bed  earlier  and  getting 
up  earlier  he  might  save  window-curtains  and  the 
evening  lamp.  He  might  sleep  in  the  same  shirt  he 
wears  during  the  day,  might  step  barefooted  upon  the 
floor,  and  go  out  into  the  yard  ;  he  might  wash  at  the 
pump — in  a  word,  he  might  live  like  those  who  work 
for  him,  and  might  thus  save  all  this  work  that  is  done 
for  him.  He  might  save  all  the  labour  expended  upon 
his  clothing,  his  refined  food,  his  recreations.  And  he 
knows  under  what  conditions  all  these  labours  are 
performed  :  how'  in  performing  them  men  perish,  suffer, 
and  often  hate  those  who  take  advantage  of  their 
poverty  to  force  them  to  do  it. 

How,  then,  is  such  a  man  to  do  good  to  others  and 
lead  a  righteous  life,  without  abandoning  this  self- 
indulgent,  luxurious  life  ? 

But  we  need  not  speak  of  how  other  people  appear 


74  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

in  our  eyes — every  one  must  see  and  feel  this  concerning 
himself. 

I  cannot  but  repeat  this  same  thing  again  and  again, 
notwithstanding  the  cold  and  hostile  silence  with  which 
my  words  are  received.  A  moral  man,  living  a  life  of 
comfort,  a  man  even  of  the  middle  class  (I  will  not 
speak  of  the  upper  classes,  who  daily  consume  to  satisfy 
their  caprices  the  results  of  hundreds  of  working  days), 
cannot  live  quietly,  knowing  that  all  that  he  is  using  is 
produced  by  the  labour  and  crushed  lives  of  working 
people,  who  are  dying  without  hope — ignorant,  drunken, 
dissolute,  half-savage  creatures  employed  in  mines, 
factories,  and  at  agricultural  labour,  producing  the 
articles  that  he  uses. 

At  the  present  moment  I  who  am  writing  this  and 
you  who  will  read  it,  whoever  you  may  be — both  you 
and  I  have  wholesome,  sufficient,  perhaps  abundant 
and  luxurious  food,  pure,  warm  air  to  breathe,  winter 
and  summer  clothing,  various  recreations,  and,  most 
important  of  all,  we  have  leisure  by  day  and  undisturbed 
repose  at  night.  And  here,  by  our  side,  live  the 
working  people,  who  have  neither  wholesome  food,  nor 
healthy  lodgings,  nor  sufficient  clothing,  nor  recrea- 
tion^, and  who,  above  all,  are  deprived  not  only  of 
leisure  but  even  of  rest :  old  men,  children,  women, 
worn  out  by  labour,  by  sleepless  nights,  by  disease, 
who  spend  their  whole  lives  providing  for  us  those 
articles  of  comfort  and  luxury  which  they  do  not 
possess,  and  which  are  for  us  not  necessaries  but  super- 
fluities. Therefore,  a  moral  man,  I  do  not  say  a 
Christian,  but  simply  a  man  professing  humane  views 
or  merely  esteeming  justice,  cannot  but  wish  to  change 
his  life  and  to  cease  to  use  articles  of  luxury  produced 
under  such  conditions. 

If  a  man  really  pities  those  who  manufacture  tobacco, 
then  the  first  thing  he  will  naturally  do  will  be  to 
cease  smoking,  because  by  continuing  to  buy  and 
smoke  tobacco  he  encourages  the  preparation  of 
tobacco,  by  which  men's  health  is  destroyed.  And  so 
with  every  other  article  of  luxury.     Jf  a  man  can  still 


THE  FIRST  STEP  & 

continue  to  eat  bread  notwithstanding  the  hard  work 
by  which  it  is  produced,  this  is  because  he  cannot 
forego  what  is  indispensable  while  waiting  for  the 
present  conditions  of  labour  to  be  altered.  But  with 
regard  to  things  which  are  not  only  unnecessary  but 
are  even  superfluous,  there  can  be  no  other  conclusion 
than  this :  that  if  I  pity  men  engaged  in  the  manu- 
facture of  certain  articles,  then  I  must  on  no  account 
accustom  myself  to  require  such  articles. 

But  nowadays  men  argue  otherwise.  They  invent 
the  most  various  and  intricate  arguments,  but  never  say 
what  naturally  occurs  to  every  plain  man.  According 
to  them,  it  is  not  at  all  necessary  to  abstain  from 
luxuries.  One  can  sympathize  with  the  condition  of 
the  working  men,  deliver  speeches  and  write  books 
on  their  behalf,  and  at  the  same  time  continue  to 
profit  by  the  labour  that  one  sees  to  be  ruinous  to 
them. 

According  to  one  argument,  I  may  profit  by  labour 
that  is  harmful  to  the  workers,  because  if  I  do  not 
another  will.  Which  is  something  like  the  argument 
that  I  must  drink  wine  that  is  injurious  to  me,  because 
it  has  been  bought,  and  if  I  do  not  drink  it  others  will 
do  so. 

According  to  another  argument,  it  is  even  beneficial 
to  the  workers  to  be  allowed  to  produce  luxuries,  as  in 
this  way  we  provide  them  with  money — i.e.,  with  the 
means  of  subsistence  :  as  if  we  could  not  provide  them 
with  the  means  of  subsistence  in  any  other  way  than 
by  making  them  produce  articles  injurious  to  them  and 
superfluous  to  us.  ' 

But  according  to  a  third  argument,  now  most  popular, 
it  seems  that,  since  there  is  such  a  thing  as  division  of 
labour,  any  work  upon  which  a  man  is  engaged — 
whether  he  be  a  Government  official,  priest,  landowner, 
manufacturer,  or  merchant — is  so  useful  that  it  fully 
compensates  for  the  labour  of  the  working  classes  by 
which  he  profits.  One  serves  the  State,  another  the 
Church,  a  third  science,  a  fourth  art,  and  a  fifth  serves 
those  who  serve  the  State,  science,  and  art ;  and  all  are 


76  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

firmly  convinced  that  what  they  give  to  mankind  cer- 
tainly compensates  for  all  they  take.  And  it  is  astonish- 
ing how,  while  continually  augmenting  their  luxurious 
requirements  without  increasing  their  activity,  these 
people  continue  to  be  certain  that  their  activity  com- 
pensates for  all  they  consume. 

Whereas,  if  you  listen  to  these  people's  judgment  of 
one  another,  it  appears  that  each  individual  is  far  from 
being  worth  what  he  consumes.  Government  officials 
say  that  the  work  of  the  landlords  is  not  worth  what 
they  spend,  landlords  say  the  same  about  merchants, 
and  merchants  about  Government  officials,  and  so  on. 
But  this  does  not  disconcert  them,  and  they  continue 
to  assure  people  that  they  (each  of  them)  profit  by  the 
labours  of  others  exactly  in  proportion  to  the  service 
they  render  to  others.  So  that  the  payment  is  not 
determined  by  the  work,  but  the  value  of  the  imaginary 
work  is  determined  by  the  payment.  Thus  they  assure 
one  another,  but  they  know  perfectly  well  in  the  depth  of 
their  souls  that  all  their  arguments  do  not  justify  them ; 
that  they  are  not  necessary  to  the  working  men,  and 
that  they  profit  by  the  labour  of  these  men,  not  on 
account  of  any  division  of  labour,  but  simply  because 
they  have  the  power  to  do  so,  and  because  they  are  so 
spoiled  that  they  cannot  do  without  it. 

And  all  this  arises  from  people  imagining  that  it  is 
possible  to  lead  a  good  life  without  first  acquiring  the 
primary  quality  necessary  for  a  good  life. 

And  this  first  quality  is  self-control. 


There  never  has  been,  and  cannot  be,  a  good  life 
without  self-control.  Apart  from  self-control,  no  good 
life  is  imaginable.  The  attainment  of  goodness  must 
begin  with  that. 

There  is  a  scale  of  virtues,  and  it  is  necessary,  if  one 
would  mount  the  higher  steps,  to  begin  with  the 
lowest ;  and  the  first  virtue  a  man  must  acquire  if  he 
wishes  to  acquire  the  others,  is  that  which  the  ancients 


THE  FIRST  STEP  77 

called  iyKpdreia  or  <rw<ppoa6pr) — i.e.,  self-control  or 
moderation. 

If,  in  the  Christian  teaching,  self-control  was  included 
in  the  conception  of  self-renunciation,  still  the  order  of 
succession  remained  the  same,  and  the  acquirement 
of  no  Christian  virtue  is  possible  without  self-control — 
and  this  not  because  such  a  rule  has  been  invented  by 
any  one,  but  because  such  is  the  essential  nature  of  the 
case. 

But  even  self-control,  the  first  step  in  every 
righteous  life,  is  not  attainable  all  at  once,  but  only 
by  degrees. 

Self-control  is  the  liberation  of  man  from  desires — 
their  subordination  to  moderation,  awcppoauvr).  But  a 
man's  desires  are  many  and  various,  and  in  order 
successfully  to  contend  with  them  he  must  begin 
with  the  fundamental  ones — those  upon  which  the 
more  complex  ones  have  grown  up — and  not  with 
those  complex  lusts  which  have  grown  up  upon  the 
fundamental  ones.  There  are  complex  lusts,  like  that 
of  the  adornment  of  the  body,  sports,  amusements, 
idle  talk,  inquisitiveness,  and  many  others  ;  and  there 
are  also  fundamental  lusts — gluttony,  idleness,  sexual 
love.  And  one  must  begin  to  contend  with  these  lusts 
from  the  beginning :  not  with  the  complex,  but  with 
the  fundamental  ones,  and  that  also  in  a  definite  order. 
And  this  order  is  determined  both  by  the  nature  of 
things  and  by  the  tradition  of  human  wisdom. 

A  man  who  eats  too  much  cannot  strive  against  lazi- 
ness, while  a  gluttonous  and  idle  man  will  never  be 
able  to  contend  with  sexual  lust.  Therefore,  according 
to  all  moral  teachings,  the  effort  towards  self-control 
commences  with  a  struggle  against  the  lust  of  gluttony 
— commences  with  fasting.  In  our  time,  however,  every 
serious  relation  to  the  attainment  of  a  good  life  has 
been  so  long  and  so  completely  lost,  that  not  only  is  the 
very  first  virtue — self-control — without  which  the  others 
are  unattainable,  regarded  as  superfluous,  but  the  order 
of  succession  necessary  for  the  attainment  of  this  first 
virtue  is  also  disregarded,  and  fasting  is  quite  forgotten, 


78  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

or  is  looked  upon  as  a  silly  superstition,  utterly  un- 
necessary. 

And  yet,  just  as  the  first  condition  of  a  good  life  is 
self-control,  so  the  first  condition  of  a  life  of  self- 
control  is  fasting. 

One  may  wish  to  be  good,  one  may  dream  of  good- 
ness, without  fasting  ;  but  to  be  good  without  fasting  is 
as  impossible  as  it  is  to  advance  without  getting  up  on 
to  one's  feet. 

Fasting  is  an  indispensable  condition  of  a  good  life, 
whereas  gluttony  is,  and  always  has  been,  the  first  sign 
of  the  opposite — a  bad  life ;  and,  unfortunately,  this  vice 
is  in  the  highest  degree  characteristic  of  the  life  of  the 
majority  of  the  men  of  our  time. 

Look  at  the  faces  and  figures  of  the  men  of  our  circle 
and  day — on  all  those  faces  with  pendent  cheeks  and 
chins,  those  corpulent  limbs  and  prominent  stomachs, 
lies  the  indelible  seal  of  a  dissolute  life.  Nor  can  it  be 
otherwise.  Consider  our  life  and  the  actuating  motive 
of  the  majority  of  men  in  our  society,  and  then  ask 
yourself,  What  is  the  chief  interest  of  this  majority  ? 
And,  strange  as  it  may  appear  to  us  who  are  accus- 
tomed f  to  hide  our  real  interests  and  to  profess  false, 
artificial  ones,  you  will  find  that  the  chief  interest  of 
their  life  is  the  satisfaction  of  the  palate,  the  pleasure 
of  eating — gluttony.  From  the  poorest  to  the  richest, 
eating  is,  I  think,  the  chief  aim,  the  chief  pleasure,  of 
our  life.  Poor  working  people  form  an  exception,  but 
only  inasmuch  as  want  prevents  their  addicting  them- 
selves to  this  passion.  No  sooner  have  they  the  time 
and  the  means,  than,  in  imitation  of  the  higher  classes, 
they  procure  what  is  most  tasty  and  sweet,  and  eat  and 
drink  as  much  as  they  can.  The  more  they  eat,  the 
more  do  they  deem  themselves,  not  only  happy,  but  also 
strong  and  healthy.  And  in  this  conviction  they  are 
encouraged  by  the  upper  classes,  who  regard  food  in 
precisely  the  same  way.  The  educated  classes  (follow- 
ing the  medical  men  who  assure  them  that  the  most 
expensive  food,  flesh,  is  the  most  wholesome)  imagine 
that  happiness  and  health  consist  in  tasty,  nourishing, 


THE  FIRST  STEP  » 

easily  digested  food — in  gorging ;  though  they  try  to 
conceal  this. 

Look  at  rich  people's  lives,  listen  to  their  conversa- 
tion. What  lofty  subjects  seem  to  occupy  them  : 
philosophy,  science,  art,  poetry,  the  distribution  of 
wealth,  the  welfare  of  the  people,  and  the  education  of 
the  young  ;  but  all  this  is,  for  the  immense  majority, 
a  sham, — all  this  occupies  them  in  the  intervals  of 
business,  real  business :  between  lunch  and  dinner, 
while  the  stomach  is  full  and  it  is  impossible  to  eat 
more.  The  only  real  living  interest  of  the  majority 
both  of  men  and  women,  especially  after  early  youth,  is 
eating — How  to  eat,  what  to  eat,  where  and  when  to  eat? 

No  solemnity,  no  rejoicing,  no  consecration,  no 
opening  of  anything,  can  dispense  with  eating. 

Watch  people  travelling.  In  their  case  the  thing  is 
specially  evident.  e  Museums,  libraries,  Parliament — 
how  very  interesting !  But  where  shall  we  dine  ? 
Where  is  one  best  fed?'  Look  at  people  when  they 
come  together  for  dinner,  dressed  up,  perfumed,  around 
a  table  decorated  with  flowers — how  joyfully  they  rub 
their  hands  and  smile  ! 

If  we  could  look  into  the  hearts  of  the  majority  of 
people,  what  should  we  mid  they  most  desire  ?  Appe- 
tite for  breakfast  and  for  dinner.  What  is  the  severest 
punishment  from  infancy  upwards?  To  be  put  on 
bread  and  water.  What  artisans  get  the  highest 
wages  ?  Cooks.  What  is  the  chief  interest  of  the 
mistress  of  the  house?  To  what  subject  does  the 
conversation  of  middle-class  housewives  generally  tend? 
If  the  conversation  of  the  members  of  the  higher  classes 
does  not  tend  in  the  same  direction,  it  is  not  because 
they  are  better  educated  or  are  occupied  with  higher 
interests,  but  simply  because  they  have  a  house-keeper 
or  a  steward  who  relieves  them  of  all  anxiety  about 
their  dinner.  But  once  deprive  them  of  this  con- 
venience, and  you  will  see  what  causes  them  most 
anxiety.  It  all  comes  round  to  the  subject  of  eating  : 
the  price  of  grouse,  the  best  way  of  making  coifee,  of 
baking    sweet    cakes,    etc.     People    come   together — 


80  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

whatever  the  occasion :  a  christening",  a  funeral,  a 
wedding,  the  consecration  of  a  church,  the  departure 
or  arrival  of  a  friend,  the  consecration  of  regimental 
colours,  the  celebration  of  a  memorable  day,  the  death 
or  birth  of  a  great  scientist,  philosopher,  or  teacher  of 
morality — men  come  together  as  if  occupied  by  the 
most  lofty  interests.  So  they  say  ;  but  it  is  only  a 
pretence  :  they  all  know  that  there  will  be  eating- — 
good  tasty  food — and  drinking,  and  it  is  chiefly  this 
that  brings  them  together.  For  several  days  before, 
to  this  end,  animals  have  been  slaughtered,  baskets  of 
provisions  brought  from  gastronomic  shops  ;  cooks  and 
their  helpers,  kitchen  boys  and  maids,  specially  attired 
in  clean,  starched  frocks  and  caps,  have  been  ' at  work.' 
Chefs,  receiving  £50  a  month  and  more,  have  been 
occupied  in  giving  directions.     Cooks  have  been  chop- 

f>ing,  kneading,  roasting,  arranging,  adorning.  With 
ike  solemnity  and  importance  a  master  of  the  cere- 
monies has  been  working,  calculating,  pondering, 
adjusting  with  his  eye,  like  an  artist.  A  gardener  has 
beenr employed  upon  the  flowers.  Scullery-maids.  .  .  . 
An  army  of  men  has  been  at  work,  the  result  of 
thousands  of  working  days  are  being  swallowed  up,  and 
all  this  that  people  may  come  together  to  talk  about 
some  great  teacher  of  science  or  morality,  or  to  recall 
the  memory  of  a  deceased  friend,  or  to  greet  a  young 
couple  just  entering  upon  a  new  life. 

In  the  middle  and  lower  classes  it  is  perfectly  evident 
that  every  festivity,  every  funeral  or  wedding,  means 
gluttony.  There  the  matter  is  so  understood.  To 
such  an  extent  is  gluttony  the  motive  of  the  assembly 
that  in  Greek  and  in  French  the  same  word  means 
both  ' wedding'  and  * feast.'  But  in  the  upper  classes 
of  the  rich,  especially  among  the  refined,  who  have 
long  possessed  wealth,  great  skill  is  used  to  conceal 
this,  and  to  make  it  appear  that  eating  is  a  secondary 
matter,  necessary  only  for  appearance.  And  this 
pretence  is  easy,  as  in  the  majority  of  cases  the  guests 
are  satiated  in  the  true  sense  of  the  word — they  are 
never  hungry. 


THE  FIRST  STEP  81 

They  pretend  that  dinner,  eating,  is  not  necessary  to 
them,  is  even  a  burden  ;  but  this  a  lie.  Try  giving 
them — instead  of  the  refined  dishes  they  expect,  I  do 
not  say  bread  and  water,  but — porridge  or  gruel  or 
something  of  that  kind,  and  see  what  a  storm  it  will 
call  forth,  and  how  evident  will  become  the  real  truth, 
namely,  that  the  chief  interest  of  the  assembly  is,  not 
the  ostensible  one,  but — gluttony. 

Look  at  what  men  sell ;  go  through  a  town  and  see 
what  men  buy — articles  of  adornment  and  things  to 
devour.  And  indeed  this  must  be  so,  it  cannot  be 
otherwise.  It  is  only  possible  not  to  think  about  eat- 
ing, to  keep  this  lust  under  control,  when  a  man  does 
not  eat  except  in  obedience  to  necessity  ;  but  if  a  man 
ceases  to  eat  only  in  obedience  to  necessity — i.e.,  when 
the  stomach  is  full — then  the  state  of  things  cannot 
but  be  what  it  actually  is.  If  men  love  the  pleasure  of 
eating,  if  they  allow  themselves  to  love  this  pleasure, 
if  they  find  it  good  (as  is  the  case  with  the  vast  majority 
of  men  in  our  time,  and  with  educated  men  quite  as 
much  as  with  uneducated,  although  they  pretend  that 
it  is  not  so),  there  is  no  limit  to  the  augmentation  of 
this  pleasure,  no  limit  beyond  which  it  may  not  grow. 
The  satisfaction  of  a  need  has  limits,  but  pleasure  has 
none.  For  the  satisfaction  of  our  needs  it  is  necessary 
and  sufficient  to  eat  bread,  porridge,  or  rice ;  for  the 
augmentation  of  pleasure  there  is  no  end  to  the 
possible  flavourings  and  seasonings. 

Bread  is  a  necessary  and  sufficient  food.  (This  is 
proved  by  the  millions  of  men  who  are  strong,  active, 
healthy,  and  hard-working  on  rye  bread  alone.)  But 
it  is  pleasanter  to  eat  bread  with  some  flavouring.  It 
is  well  to  soak  the  bread  in  water  boiled  with  meat. 
Still  better  to  put  into  this  water  some  vegetable  or, 
better  yet,  several  vegetables.  It  is  well  to  eat  flesh. 
And  flesh  is  better  not  stewed,  but  roasted  ;  and  it  is 
better  still  with  butter,  and  underdone,  and  choosing 
out  certain  special  parts  of  the  meat.  But  add  to  this 
vegetables  and  mustard.  And  drink  wine  with  it,  red 
wine  for  preference.     One  does  not  need  any  more,  but 

p 


82  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

one  can  yet  eat  some  fish  if  it  is  well  flavoured  with 
sauces  and  swallowed  down  with  white  wine.  It  would 
seem  as  if  one  could  get  through  nothing  more,  either 
rich  or  tasty,  but  a  sweet  dish  can  still  be  managed  :  in 
summer  ices,  in  winter  stewed  fruits,  preserves,  etc. 
And  thus  we  have  a  dinner,  a  modest  dinner.  The 
pleasure  of  such  a  dinner  can  be  greatly  augmented. 
And  it  is  augmented,  and  there  is  no  limit  to  this  aug- 
mentation :  stimulating  snacks,  hors-d'oeuvres  before 
dinner,  and  entremets  and  desserts,  and  various  com- 
binations of  tasty  things,  and  flowers  and  decorations 
and  music  during  dinner. 

And,  strange  to  say,  men  who  daily  overeat  them- 
selves at  such  dinners — in  comparison  with  which  the 
feast  of  Belshazzar,  that  evoked  the  prophetic  warning, 
was  nothing — are  naively  persuaded  that  they  may  yet 
be  leading  a  moral  life. 


Fasting  is  an  indispensable  condition  of  a  good  life  ; 
but  iri  fasting,  as  in  self-control  in  general,  the  ques- 
tion arises,  with  what  shall  we  begin  ? — How  to  fast, 
how  often  to  eat,  what  to  eat,  what  to  avoid  eating  ?  And 
as  we  can  do  no  work  seriously  without  regarding  the 
necessary  order  of  sequence,  so  also  we  cannot  fast  with- 
out knowing  where  to  begin — with  what  to  commence 
self-control  in  food. 

Fasting  !  And  even  an  analysis  of  how  to  fast,  and 
where  to  begin  !  The  notion  seems  ridiculous  and  wild 
to  the  majority  of  men. 

I  remember  how,  with  pride  at  his  originality,  an 
Evangelical  preacher,  who  was  attacking  monastic 
asceticism,  once  said  to  me,  '  Ours  is  not  a  Christianity 
of  fasting  and  privations,  but  of  beefsteaks/  Christ- 
ianity, or  virtue  in  general — and  beefsteaks  ! 

During  a  long  period  of  darkness  and  lack  of  all 
guidance,  Pagan  or  Christian,  so  many  wild,  immoral 
ideas  have  made  their  way  into  our  life  (especially  into 
that  lower  region  of  the  first  steps  toward  a  good  life — 
our  relation  to  food,  to  which  no  one  paid  any  atten- 


THE  FIRST  STEP  83 

tion),  that  it  is  difficult  for  us  even  to  understand  the 
audacity  and  senselessness  of  upholding,  in  our  days, 
Christianity  or  virtue  with  beefsteaks. 

We  are  not  horrified  by  this  association,  solely  because 
a  strange  thing  has  befallen  us.  We  look  and  see  not : 
listen  and  hear  not.  There  is  no  bad  odour,  no  sound, 
no  monstrosity,  to  which  man  cannot  become  so  accus- 
tomed that  he  ceases  to  remark  what  would  strike  a 
man  unaccustomed  to  it.  Precisely  so  it  is  in  the  moral 
region.     Christianity  and  morality  with  beefsteaks  ! 

A  few  days  ago  I  visited  the  slaughter-house  in  our 
town  of  Toula.  It  is  built  on  the  new  and  improved 
system  practised  in  large  towns,  with  a  view  to  causing 
the  animals  as  little  suffering  as  possible.  It  was  on  a 
Friday,  two  days  before  Trinity  Sunday.  There  were 
many  cattle  there. 

Long  before  this,  when  reading  that  excellent  book, 
The  Ethics  of  Diet,  I  had  wished  to  visit  a  slaughter- 
house, in  order  to  see  with  my  own  eyes  the  'reality  of 
the  question  raised  when  vegetarianism  is  discussed. 
But  at  first  I  felt  ashamed  to  do  so,  as  one  is  always 
ashamed  of  going  to  look  at  suffering  which  one  knows 
is  about  to  take  place,  but  which  one  cannot  avert ;  and 
so  I  kept  putting  off  my  visit. 

But  a  little  while  ago  I  met  on  the  road  a  butcher 
returning  to  Toula  after  a  visit  to  his  home.  He  is  not 
yet  an  experienced  butcher,  and  his  duty  is  to  stab  with 
a  knife.  I  asked  him  whether  he  did  not  feel  sorry  for 
the  animals  that  he  killed.  He  gave  me  the  usual 
answer:  '  Why  should  I  feel  sorry?  It  is  necessary/ 
But  when  I  told  him  that  eating  flesh  is  not  necessary, 
but  is  only  a  luxury,  he  agreed  ;  and  then  he  admitted 
that  he  was  sorry  for  the  animals.  (  But  what  can  I 
do  ?  I  must  earn  my  bread,'  he  said.  i  At  first  I  was 
afraid  to  kill.  My  father,  he  never  even  killed  a 
chicken  in  all  his  life/  The  majority  of  Russians 
cannot  kill ;  they  feel  pity,  and  express  the  feeling  by 
the  word  'fear.'  This  man  had  also  been  '  afraid/  but 
he  was  so  no  longer.     He  told  me  that  most  of  the 

f  2 


8J=  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

work  was  done  on  Fridays,  when  it  continues  until  the 
evening. 

Not  long  ago  I  also  had  a  talk  with  a  retired  soldier, 
a  butcher,  and  he,  too,  was  surprised  at  my  assertion 
that  it  was  a  pity  to  kill,  and  said  the  usual  things 
about  its  being  ordained  ;  but  afterwards  he  agreed 
with  me :  ( Especially  when  they  are  quiet,  tame 
cattle.  They  come,  poor  things  !  trusting  you.  It 
is  very  pitiful.' 

This  is  dreadful  !  Not  the  suffering  and  death  of  the 
animals,  but  that  man  suppresses  in  himself,  unneces- 
sarily, the  highest  spiritual  capacity — that  of  sympathy 
and  pity  toward  living  creatures  like  himself — and  by 
violating  his  own  feelings  becomes  cruel.  And  how 
deeply  seated  in  the  human  heart  is  the  injunction  not 
to  take  life ! 

Once,  when  walking  from  Moscow,*  I  was  offered  a 
lift  by  some  carters  who  were  going  from  Serpouhof  to 
a  neighbouring  forest  to  fetch  wood.  It  was  the 
Thursday  before  Easter.  I  was  seated  in  the  first  cart, 
witfra  strong,  red,  coarse  carman,  who  evidently  drank. 
On  entering  a  village  we  saw  a  well-fed,  naked,  pink 
pig  being  dragged  out  of  the  first  yard  to  be  slaughtered. 
It  squealed  in  a  dreadful  voice,  resembling  the  shriek 
of  a  man.  Just  as  we  were  passing  they  began  to  kill 
it.  A  man  gashed  its  throat  with  a  knife.  The  pig 
squealed  still  more  loudly  and  piercingly,  broke  away 
from  the  men,  and  ran  off  covered  with  blood.  Being 
near-sighted  I  did  not  see  all  the  details.  I  saw  only 
the  human-looking  pink  body  of  the  pig  and  heard  its 
desperate  squeal ;  but  the  carter  saw  all  the  details 
and  watched  closely.  They  caught  the  pig,  knocked 
it  down,  and  finished  cutting  its  throat.  When  its 
squeals  ceased  the  carter  sighed  heavily.  fDo  men 
really  not  have  to  answer  for  such  things?'  he  said. 

*  When  returning  to  Yasnaya  Polyana  in  spring,  after  his 
winter's  residence  in  Moscow,  Tolstoy  repeatedly  chose  to 
walk  the  distance  (something  over  130  miles)  instead  of 
going  by  rail.  Serpouhof  is  a  town  he  had  to  pass  on  the 
way. 


THE  FIRST  STEP  85 

So  strong  is  man's  aversion  to  all  killing.  But  by 
example,  by  encouraging  greediness,  by  the  assertion 
that  God  has  allowed  it,  and,  above  all,  by  habit,  people 
entirely  lose  this  natural  feeling. 

On  Friday  I  decided  to  go  to  Toula,  and,  meeting  a 
meek,  kind  acquaintance  of  mine,  I  invited  him  to 
accompany  me. 

i  Yes,  I  have  heard  that  the  arrangements  are  good, 
and  have  been  wishing  to  go  and  see  it ;  but  if  they  are 
slaughtering  I  will  not  go  in.' 

'  Why  not?  That's  just  what  I  want  to  see  !  If  we 
eat  flesh  it  must  be  killed.5 

'  No,  no,  I  cannot !' 

It  is  worth  remarking  that  this  man  is  a  sportsman 
and  himself  kills  animals  and  birds. 

So  we  went  to  the  slaughter-house.  Even  at  the 
entrance  one  noticed  the  heavy,  disgusting,  fetid  smell, 
as  of  carpenter's  glue,  or  paint  on  glue.  The  nearer 
we  approached,  the  stronger  became  the  smell.  The 
building  is  of  red  brick,  very  large,  with  vaults  and 
high  chimneys.  We  entered  the  gates.  To  the  right 
was  a  spacious  enclosed  yard,  three-quarters  of  an  acre 
in  extent — twice  a  week  cattle  are  driven  in  here  for 
sale — and  adjoining  this  enclosure  was  the  porter's 
lodge.  To  the  left  were  the  chambers,  as  they  are 
called — i.e.,  rooms  with  arched  entrances,  sloping 
asphalt  floors,  and  contrivances  for  moving  and  hang- 
ing up  the  carcasses.  On  a  bench  against  the  wall  of 
the  porter's  lodge  were  seated  half  a  dozen  butchers, 
in  aprons  covered  with  blood,  their  tucked-up  sleeves 
disclosing  their  muscular  arms  also  besmeared  with 
blood.  They  had  finished  their  work  half  an  hour 
before,  so  that  day  we  could  only  see  the  empty  cham- 
bers. Though  these  chambers  were  open  on  both 
sides,  there  was  an  oppressive  smell  of  warm  blood  ; 
the  floor  was  brown  and  shining,  with  congealed  black 
blood  in  the  cavities. 

One  of  the  butchers  described  the  process  of  slaugh- 
tering, and  showed  us  the  place  where  it  was  done.  I 
did  not  quite  understand  him,  and  formed  a  wrong, 


86  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

but  very  horrible,  idea  of  the  way  the  animals  are 
slaughtered  ;  and  1  fancied  that,  as  is  often  the  case, 
the  reality  would  very  likely  produce  upon  me  a 
weaker  impression  than  the  imagination.  But  in  this 
I  was  mistaken. 

The  next  time  I  visited  the  slaughter-house  I  went 
in  good  time.  It  was  the  Friday  before  Trinity — a 
warm  day  in  June.  The  smell  of  glue  and  blood  was 
even  stronger  and  more  penetrating  than  on  my  first 
visit.  The  work  was  at  its  height.  The  dusty  yard 
was  full  of  cattle,  and  animals  had  been  driven  into  all 
the  enclosures  beside  the  chambers. 

In  the  street,  before  the  entrance,  stood  carts  to 
which  oxen,  calves,  and  cows  were  tied.  Other  carts 
drawn  by  good  horses  and  filled  with  live  calves,  whose 
heads  hung  down  and  swayed  about,  drew  up  and  were 
unloaded  ;  and  similar  carts  containing  the  carcasses  of 
oxen,  with  trembling  legs  sticking  out,  with  heads  and 
bright  red  lungs  and  brown  livers,  drove  away  from 
the  slaughter-house.  By  the  fence  stood  the  cattle- 
dealers'  horses.  The  dealers  themselves,  in  their  long 
coats,  with  their  whips  and  knouts  in  their  hands,  were 
walking  about  the  yard,  either  marking  with  tar  cattle 
belonging  to  the  same  owner,  or  bargaining,  or  else 
guiding  oxen  and  bulls  from  the  great  yard  into  the 
enclosures  which  lead  into  the  chambers.  These  men 
were  evidently  all  preoccupied  with  money  matters  and 
calculations,  and  any  thought  as  to  whether  it  was  right 
or  wrong  to  kill  these  animals  was  as  far  from  their 
minds  as  were  questions  about  the  chemical  composition 
of  the  blood  that  covered  the  floor  of  the  chambers. 

No  butchers  were  to  be  seen  in  the  yard  ;  they  were 
all  in  the  chambers  at  work.  That  day  about  a  hundred 
head  of  cattle  were  slaughtered.  I  was  on  the  point 
of  entering  one  of  the  chambers,  but  stopped  short  at 
the  door.  I  stopped  both  because  the  chamber  was 
crowded  with  carcasses  which  were  being  moved  about, 
and  also  because  blood  was  flowing  on  the  floor  and 
dripping  from  above.  All  the  butchers  present  were 
besmeared  with  blood,  and  had  I  entered  1,  too,  should 


THE  FIRST  STEP  87 

certainly  have  been  covered  with  it.  One  suspended 
carcass  was  being  taken  down,  another  was  being 
moved  toward  the  door,  a  third,  a  slaughtered  ox,  was 
lying  with  its  white  legs  raised,  while  a  butcher  with 
strong  hand  was  ripping  up  its  tight-stretched  hide. 

Through  the  door  opposite  the  one  at  which  I  was 
standing,  a  big,  red,  well-fed  ox  was  led  in.  Two  men 
were  dragging  it,  and  hardly  had  it  entered  when  I 
saw  a  butcher  raise  a  knife  above  its  neck  and  stab  it. 
The  ox,  as  if  all  four  legs  had  suddenly  given  way,  fell 
heavily  upon  its  belly,  immediately  turned  over  on  one 
side,  and  began  to  work  its  legs  and  all  its  hind- 
quarters. Another  butcher  at  once  threw  himself  upon 
the  ox  from  the  side  opposite  to  the  twitching  legs, 
caught  its  horns  and  twisted  its  head  down  to  the 
ground,  while  another  butcher  cut  its  throat  with  a 
knife.  From  beneath  the  head  there  flowed  a  stream 
of  blackish-red  blood,  which  a  besmeared  boy  caught 
in  a  tin  basin.  All  the  time  this  was  going  on  the  ox 
kept  incessantly  twitching  its  head  as  if  trying  to  get 
up,  and  waved  its  four  legs  in  the  air.  The  basin  was 
quickly  filling,  but  the  ox  still  lived,  and,  its  stomach 
heaving  heavily,  both  hind  and  fore  legs  worked  so 
violently  that  the  butchers  held  aloof.  When  one 
basin  was  full,  the  boy  carried  it  away  on  his  head  to 
the  albumen  factory,  while  another  boy  placed  a  fresh 
basin,  which  also  soon  began  to  fill  up.  But  still  the 
ox  heaved  its  body  and  worked  its  hind  legs. 

When  the  blood  ceased  to  flow  the  butcher  raised  the 
animal's  head  and  began  to  skin  it.  The  ox  continued 
to  writhe.  The  head,  stripped  of  its  skin,  showed  red 
with  white  veins,  and  kept  the  position  given  it  by  the 
butcher ;  on  both  sides  hung  the  skin.  Still  the 
animal  did  not  cease  to  writhe.  Then  another  butcher 
caught  hold  of  one  of  the  legs,  broke  it,  and  cut  it  off. 
In  the  remaining  legs  and  the  stomach  the  convulsions 
still  continued.  The  other  legs  were  cut  off  and  thrown 
aside,  together  with  those  of  other  oxen  belonging  to 
the  same  owner.  Then  the  carcass  was  dragged  to  the 
hoist  and  hung  up,  and  the  convulsions  were  over. 


88  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

Thus  I  looked  on  from  the  door  at  the  second,  third, 
fourth  ox.  It  was  the  same  with  each  :  the  same 
cutting  off  of  the  head  with  bitten  tongue,  and  the 
same  convulsed  members.  The  only  difference  was 
that  the  butcher  did  not  always  strike  at  once  so  as 
to  cause  the  animal's  fall.  Sometimes  he  missed  his 
aim,  whereupon  the  ox  leaped  up,  bellowed,  and, 
covered  with  blood,  tried  to  escape*  But  then  his 
head  was  pulled  under  a  bar,  struck  a  second  time,  and 
he  fell. 

I  afterwards  entered  by  the  door  at  which  the  oxen 
were  led  in.  Here  1  saw  the  same  thing,  only  nearer, 
and  therefore  more  plainly.  But  chiefly  I  saw  here, 
what  I  had  not  seen  before,  how  the  oxen  were  forced 
to  enter  this  door.  Each  time  an  ox  was  seized  in  the 
enclosure  and  pulled  forward  by  a  rope  tied  to  its  horns, 
the  animal,  smelling  blood,  refused  to  advance,  and 
sometimes  bellowed  and  drew  back.  It  would  have 
been  beyond  the  strength  of  two  men  to  drag  it  in  by 
force,  so  one  of  the  butchers  went  round  each  time, 
grasped  the  animal's  tail  and  twisted  it  so  violently 
that  the  gristle  crackled,  and  the  ox  advanced. 

When  they  had  finished  with  the  cattle  of  one  owner, 
they  brought  in  those  of  another.  The  first  animal  of 
this  next  lot  was  not  an  ox,  but  a  bull— a  fine,  well-bred 
creature,  black,  with  white  spots  on  its  legs,  young, 
muscular,  full  of  energy.  He  was  dragged  forward, 
but  he  lowered  his  head  and  resisted  sturdily.  Then 
the  butcher  who  followed  behind  seized  the  tail,  like 
an  engine-driver  grasping  the  handle  of  a  whistle, 
twisted  it,  the  gristle  crackled,  and  the  bull  rushed 
forward,  upsetting  the  men  who  held  the  rope.  Then 
it  stopped,  looking  sideways  with  its  black  eyes,  the 
whites  of  which  had  filled  with  blood.  But  again  the 
tail  crackled,  and  the  bull  sprang  forward  and  readied 
the  required  spot.  The  striker  approached,  took  aim, 
and  struck.  But  the  blow  missed  the  mark.  The  bull 
leaped  up,  shook  his  head,  bellowed,  and,  covered  with 
blood,  broke  free  and  rushed  back.  The  men  at  the 
doorway  all  sprang  aside  ;  but  the  experienced  butchers, 


THE  FIRST  STEP  89 

with  the  dash  of  men  inured  to  danger,  quickly  caught 
the  rope ;  again  the  tail  operation  was  repeated,  and 
again  the  bull  was  in  the  chamber,  where  he  was 
dragged  under  the  bar,  from  which  he  did  not  again 
escape.  The  striker  quickly  took  aim  at  the  spot  where 
the  hair  divides  like  a  star,  and,  notwithstanding  the 
blood,  found  it,  struck,  and  the  fine  animal,  full  of 
life,  collapsed,  its  head  and  legs  writhing  while  it  was 
bled  and  the  head  skinned. 

c  There,  the  cursed  devil  hasn't  even  fallen  the  right 
way  !'  grumbled  the  butcher  as  he  cut  the  skin  from 
the  head. 

P'ive  minutes  later  the  head  was  stuck  up,  red  instead 
of  black,  without  skin  ;  the  eyes,  that  had  shone  with 
such  splendid  colour  five  minutes  before,  fixed  and 
glassy. 

Afterwards  I  went  into  the  compartment  where  small 
animals  are  slaughtered — a  very  large  chamber  with 
asphalt  floor,  and  tables  with  backs,  on  which  sheep 
and  calves  are  killed.  Here  the  work  was  already 
finished ;  in  the  long  room,  impregnated  with  the 
smell  of  blood,  were  only  two  butchers.  One  was 
blowing  into  the  leg  of  a  dead  lamb  and  patting  the 
swollen  stomach  with  his  hand ;  the  other,  a  young 
fellow  in  an  apron  besmeared  with  blood,  was  smoking 
a  bent  cigarette.  There  was  no  one  else  in  the  long, 
dark  chamber,  filled  with  a  heavy  smell.  After  me 
there  entered  a  man,  apparently  an  ex-soldier,  bringing 
in  a  young  yearling  ram,  black  with  a  white  mark  on 
its  neck,  and  its  legs  tied.  This  animal  he  placed  upon 
one  of  the  tables,  as  if  upon  a  bed.  The  old  soldier 
greeted  the  butchers,  with  whom  he  was  evidently 
acquainted,  and  began  to  ask  when  their  master  allowed 
them  leave.  The  fellow  with  the  cigarette  approached 
with  a  knife,  sharpened  it  on  the  edge  of  the  table,  and 
answered  that  they  were  free  on  holidays.  The  live 
ram  was  lying  as  quietly  as  the  dead  inflated  one, 
except  that  it  was  briskly  wagging  its  short  little  tail 
and  its  sides  were  heaving  more  quickly  than  usual. 
The  soldier  pressed   down   its   uplifted   head  gently, 


90  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

without  effort ;  the  butcher,  still  continuing  the  con- 
versation, grasped  with  his  left  hand  the  head  of 
the  ram  and  cut  its  throat.  The  ram  quivered,  and 
the  little  tail  stiffened  and  ceased  to  wave.  The 
fellow,  while  waiting  for  the  blood  to  flow,  began  to 
relight  his  cigarette,  which  had  gone  out.  The  blood 
flowed  and  the  ram  began  to  writhe.  The  conversation 
continued  without  the  slightest  interruption.  It  was 
horribly  revolting. 

***** 

And  how  about  those  hens  and  chickens  which  daily, 
in  thousands  of  kitchens,  with  heads  cutoff  and  stream- 
ing with  blood,  comically,  dreadfully,  flop  about,  jerking* 
their  wings  ? 

And  see,  a  kind,  refined  lady  will  devour  the  car- 
casses of  these  animals  with  full  assurance  that  she  is 
doing  right,  at  the  same  time  asserting  two  contra- 
dictory propositions : 

First,  that  she  is,  as  her  doctor  assures  her,  so  deli- 
cate that  she  cannot  be  sustained  by  vegetable  food 
alone,  and  that  for  her  feeble  organism  flesh  is  indis- 
pensable ;  and,  secondly,  that  she  is  so  sensitive  that 
she  is  unable,  not  only  herself  to  inflict  suffering  on 
animals,  but  even  to  bear  the  sight  of  suffering. 

Whereas  the  poor  lady  is  weak  precisely  because  she 
has  been  taught  to  live  upon  food  unnatural  to  man  ; 
and  she  cannot  avoid  causing  suffering  to  animals — for 
she  eats  them. 


We  cannot  pretend  that  we  do  not  know  this.  We 
are  not  ostriches,  and  cannot  believe  that  if  we  refuse 
to  look  at  what  we  do  not  wish  to  see,  it  will  not  exist. 
This  is  especially  the  case  when  what  we  do  not  wish  to 
see  is  what  we  wish  to  eat.  If  it  were  really  indispens- 
able, or,  if  not  indispensable,  at  least  in  some  way 
useful !     But  it  is  quite  unnecessary,*  and  only  serves 

*  Let  those  who  doubt  this  read  the  numerous  books  upon 
the  subject,  written  by  scientists  and  doctors — such  as 
Dr.  A.  Haig's  little  book,  Diet   and  Food,    or  his    larger 


THE  FIRST  STEP  91 

to  develop  animal  feelings,  to  excite  desire,  and  to 
promote  fornication  and  drunkenness.  And  this  is 
continually  being  confirmed  by  the  fact  that  young, 
kind,  undepraved  people — especially  women  and  girls 
— without  knowing  how  it  logically  follows,  feel  that 
virtue  is  incompatible  with  beefsteaks,  and,  as  soon  as 
they  wish  to  be  good,  give  up  eating  flesh. 

What,  then,  do  I  wish  to  say  ?  That  in  order 
to  be  moral  people  must  cease  to  eat  meat?  Not 
at  all. 

I  only  wish  to  say  that  for  a  good  life  a  certain  order 
of  good  actions  is  indispensable  ;  that  if  a  man's  aspira- 
tions toward  right  living  be  serious  they  will  inevitably 
follow  one  definite  sequence  ;  and  that  in  this  sequence 
the  first  virtue  a  man  will  strive  after  will  be  self- 
control,  self-restraint.  And  in  seeking  for  self-control 
a  man  will  inevitably  follow  one  definite  sequence,  and 
in  this  sequence  the  first  thing  will  be  self-control  in 
food — fasting.  And  in  fasting,  if  he  be  really  and 
seriously  seeking  to  live  a  good  life,  the  first  thing  from 
which  he  will  abstain  will  always  be  the  use  of  animal 
food,  because,  to  say  nothing  of  the  excitation  of  the 
passions  caused  by  such  food,  its  use  is  simply  immoral, 
as  it  involves  the  performance  of  an  act  which  is 
contrary  to  the  moral  feeling — killing  ;  and  is  called 
forth  only  by  greediness  and  the  desire  for  tasty 
food. 

The  precise  reason  why  abstinence  from  animal  food 

scientific  work  on  Uric  Acid  as  a  Factor  in  the  Causation  of 
Disease — in  which  it  is  proved  that  flesh  is  not  necessary  for 
the  nourishment  of  man.  And  let  them  not  listen  to  these 
old-fashioned  doctors  who  defend  the  assertion  that  flesh  is 
necessary,  merely  because  it  has  long  been  so  regarded  by 
their  predecessors  and  by  themselves  ;  and  who  defend 
their  opinion  with  tenacity  and  malevolence,  as  all  that  is 
old  and  traditional  always  is  defended. — L.  T. 

While  this  volume  was  in  preparation,  a  letter  was  re- 
ceived from  Tolstoy  with  instructions  to  include  the  above 
reference  to  Dr.  Haig's  works,  which  had  not  been  mentioned 
in  previous  editions  of  this  essay. 


92  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

will  be  the  first  act  of  fasting  and  of  a  moral  life  is 
admirably  explained  in  the  book,  The  Ethics  of  Diet ; 
and  not  by  one  man  only,  but  by  all  mankind  in  the 
persons  of  its  best  representatives  during  all  the  con- 
scious life  of  humanity. 

But  why,  if  the  wrongfulness — i.e.,  the  immorality — 
of  animal  food  was  known  to  humanity  so  long  ago, 
have  people  not  yet  come  to  acknowledge  this  law? 
will  be  asked  by  those  who  are  accustomed  to  be  led  by 
public  opinion  rather  than  by  reason. 

The  answer  to  this  question  is,  that  the  moral  pro- 
gress of  humanity — which  is  the  foundation  of  every 
other  kind  of  progress — is  always  slow  ;  but  that  the 
sign  of  true,  not  casual,  progress  is  its  uninterrupted- 
ness  and  its  continual  acceleration. 

And  the  progress  of  vegetarianism  is  of  this  kind. 
That  progress,  is  expressed  both  in  the  words  of  the 
writers  cited  in  the  above-mentioned  book  and  in  the 
actual  life  of  mankind,  which  from  many  causes  is 
involuntarily  passing  more  and  more  from  carniv- 
orous habits  to  vegetable  food,  and  is  also  deliber- 
ately following  the  same  path  in  a  movement  which 
shows  evident  strength,  and  which  is  growing  larger 
and  larger — viz.,  vegetarianism.  That  movement  has 
during  the  last  ten  years  advanced  more  and  more 
rapidly.  More  and  more  books  and  periodicals  on  this 
subject  appear  every  year ;  one  meets  more  and  more 
people  who  have  given  up  meat ;  and  abroad,  especially 
in  Germany,  England,  and  America,  the  number  of 
vegetarian  hotels  and  restaurants  increases  year  by 
year. 

This  movement  should  cause  especial  joy  to  those 
whose  life  lies  in  the  effort  to  bring  about  the  kingdom 
of  God  on  earth,  not  because  vegetarianism  is  in  itself 
an  important  step  towards  that  kingdom  (all  true  steps 
are  both  important  and  unimportant),  but  because  it  is 
a  siirn  that  the  aspiration  of  mankind  toward  moral 
perfection  is  serious  and  sincere,  for  it  has  taken  the  one 
unalterable  order  of  succession  natural  to  it,  beginning 
with  the  first  step. 


THE  FIRST  STEP  93 

One  cannot  fail  to  rejoice  at  this,  as  people  could  not 
fail  to  rejoice  who,  after  striving  to  reach  the  upper 
story  of  a  house  by  trying  vainly  and  at  random  to 
climb  the  walls  from  different  points,  should  at  last 
assemble  at  the  first  step  of  the  staircase  and  crowd 
towards  it,  convinced  that  there  can  be  no  way  up  except 
by  mounting  this  first  step  of  the  stairs. 

[1892.] 

The  above  essay  was  written  as  Preface  to  a  Russian 
translation  of  Howard  William's  The  Ethics  of  Diet 


V 
NON-ACTING 


The  editor  of  a  Paris  review,  thinking  that  the  opinions 
of  two  celebrated  writers  on  the  state  of  mind  that  is 
common  to-day  would  interest  me,  has  sent  me  two 
extracts  from  French  newspapers — one  containing 
Zola's  speech  delivered  at  the  banquet  of  the  General 
Association  of  Students,  the  other  containing  a  letter 
from  Dumas  to  the  editor  of  the  Gaulois. 

These  documents  interested  me  profoundly,  both  on 
account  of  their  timeliness  and  the  fame  of  their 
authors,  and  also  because  it  would  be  difficult  in 
present-day  literature  to  find  in  such  concise,  vigorous, 
and  brilliant  form,  an  expression  of  the  two  funda- 
mental forces  the  sum  of  which  moves  humanity. 
The  one  is  the  force  of  routine,  tending  to  keep 
humanity  in  its  accustomed  path  ;  the  other  is  the 
force  of  reason  and  love,  drawing  humanity  towards 
the  light. 

The  following  is  Zola's  speech  in  extenso  : 

Gentlemen, 

You  have  paid  me  a  great  honour,  and  conferred  on 
me  a  great  pleasure,  by  choosing  me  to  preside  at  this 
Annual  Banquet.  There  is  no  better  or  more  charming 
society  than  that  of  the  young.  There  is  no  audience  more 
sympathetic,  or  before  whom  one's  heart  opens  more  freely 
with  the  wish  to  be  loved  and  listened  to. 

I,  alas !  have  reached  an  age  at  which  we  begin  to  regret 
our  departed  youth,  and  to  pay  attention  to  the  efforts  of 
[  94  J 


NON-ACTING  95 

the  rising  generation  that  is  climbing  up  behind  us.  It  is 
they  who  will  both  judge  us  and  carry  on  our  work.  In 
them  I  feel  the  future  coming  to  birth,  and  at  times  I  ask 
myself,  not  without  some  anxiety,  What  of  all  our  efforts 
will  they  reject,  and  what  will  they  retain  ?  What  will 
happen  to  our  work  when  it  has  passed  into  their  hands  ? 
For  it  cannot  last  except  through  them,  and  it  will  dis- 
appear unless  they  accept  it,  to  enlarge  it  and  bring  it  to 
completion. 

That  is  why  I  eagerly  watch  the  movement  of  ideas 
among  the  youth  of  to-day,  and  read  the  advanced  papers 
and  reviews,  endeavouring  to  keep  in  touch  with  the  new 
spirit  that  animates  our  schools,  and  striving  vainly  to 
know  whither  you  are  all  wending  your  way — you,  who 
represent  the  intelligence  and  the  will  of  to-morrow. 

Certainly,  gentlemen,  egotism  plays  its  part  in  the 
matter  ;  I  do  not  hide  it.  I  am  somewhat  like  a  workman 
who,  finishing  a  house  which  he  hopes  will  shelter  his  old 
age,  is  anxious  concerning  the  weather  he  has  to  expect. 
Will  the  rain  damage  his  walls  ?  May  not  a  sudden  wind 
from  the  north  tear  the  roof  off  ?  Above  all,  has  he  built 
strongly  enough  to  resist  the  storm  ?  Has  he  spared  neither 
durable  material  nor  irksome  labour  ?  It  is  not  that  I  think 
our  work  eternal  or  final.  The  greatest  must  resign  them- 
selves to  the  thought  that  they  represent  but  a  moment  in 
the  ever-continuing  development  of  the  human  spirit ;  it 
will  be  more  than  sufficient  to  have  been  for  one  hour  the 
mouthpiece  of  a  generation  !  And  since  one  cannot  keep  a 
literature  stationary,  but  all  things  continually  evolve  and 
recommence,  one  must  expect  to  see  younger  men  born  and 
grow  up,  who  will,  perhaps,  in  their  turn  cause  you  to  be 
forgotten.  I  do  not  say  that  the  old  warrior  in  me  does 
not  at  times  desire  to  resist,  when  he  feels  his  work  attacked. 
But,  in  truth,  I  face  the  approaching  century  with  more  of 
curiosity  than  of  revolt,  and  more  of  ardent  sympathy  than 
of  personal  anxiety  ;  let  me  perish,  and  let  all  my  generation 
perish  with  me,  if,  indeed,  we  are  good  for  nothing  but  to  fill 
up  the  ditch  for  those  who  follow  us  in  the  march  towards 
the  light. 

Gentlemen,  I  constantly  hear  it  said  that  Positivism  is  at 
its  last  gasp,  that  Naturalism  is  dead,  that  Science  has 
reached  the  point  of  bankruptcy,  having  failed  to  supply 
either  the  moral  peace  or  the  human  happiness  it  promised. 


96  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

You  will  well  understand  that  I  do  not  here  undertake  to 
solve  the  great  problems  raised  by  these  questions.  I  am 
an  ignoramus,  and  have  no  authority  to  speak  in  the  name 
of  science  or  philosophy.  I  am,  if  you  please,  simply  a 
novelist,  a  writer  who  has  at  times  seen  a  little  way  into 
the  heart  of  things,  and  whose  competence  consists  only  in 
having  observed  much  and  worked  much.  And  it  is  only 
as  a  witness  that  I  allow  myself  to  speak  of  what  my  genera- 
tion— the  men  who  are  now  fifty  years  old,  and  whom  your 
generation  will  soon  regard  as  ancestors — has  been,  or  at 
least  has  wished  to  be. 

I  was  much  struck,  a  few  days  ago,  at  the  opening  of  the 
Salon  du  Champ- de- Mars,  by  the  characteristic  appearance 
of  the  rooms.  It  is  thought  that  the  pictures  are  always 
much  the  same.  That  is  an  error.  The  evolution  is  slow  ; 
but  how  astonished  one  would  be  to-day  were  it  possible  to 
revert  to  the  Salons  of  some  former  years  !  For  my  part,  I 
well  remember  the  last  academic  ana  romantic  exhibitions, 
about  1863.  Work  in  the  open  air  {le  plein  air)  had  not 
yet  triumphed  ;  there  was  a  general  tone  of  bitumen,  a 
dirtying  of  canvas,  a  prevalence  of  burnt  colours,  the  semi- 
darkness  of  studios.  Then,  some  fifteen  years  later,  after 
the  victorious  and  much-contested  influence  of  Manet,  I  can 
recall  quite  other  exhibitions,  where  the  clear  tone  of  full 
sunlight  shone  ;  it  was,  as  it  were,  an  inundation  of  light,  a 
care  for  truth  which  made  each  picture-frame  a  window 
opened  upon  Nature  bathed  in  light.  And  yesterday,  after 
another  fifteen  years,  I  could  discern,  amid  the  fresh 
limpidity  of  the  productions,  the  rising  of  a  kind  of  mystic 
fog.  There  was  the  same  care  for  clear  painting,  but  the 
reality  was  changing,  the  figures  were  more  elongated,  the 
need  of  originality  and  novelty  carried  the  artists  over  into 
the  land  of  dreams. 

If  I  have  dwelt  on  these  three  stages  of  contemporary 
painting,  I  have  done  so  because  it  seems  to  me  that  they 
correspond  very  strikingly  to  the  contemporary  movements 
of  thought.  My  generation,  indeed,  following  illustrious 
predecessors  of  whom  we  were  but  the  successors,  strove  to 
open  the  windows  wide  to  Nature,  in  order  to  see  all  and  to 
say  all.  In  our  generation,  even  among  those  least  conscious 
of  it,  the  long  efforts  of  positive  philosophy  and  of  analytical 
and  experimental  science  came  to  fruition.  Our  fealty  was 
to  Science,  which  surrounded  us  on  all  sides ;  in  her  we 


NON-ACTING  97 

lived,  breathing  the  air  of  the  epoch.  I  am  free  to  confess 
that,  personalty,  I  was  even  a  sectarian,  who  lived  to  trans- 
port the  rigid  methods  of  Science  into  the  domain  of  Litera- 
ture. But  where  can  the  man  be  found  who,  in  the  stress 
of  strife,  does  not  exceed  what  is  necessary,  and  is  content 
to  conquer  without  compromising  his  victory  ?  On  the 
whole  I  have  nothing  to  rfgret,  and  I  continue  to  believe  in 
the  passion  which  wills  and  acts.  What  enthusiasm,  what 
hope,  were  ours  !  To  know  all,  to  prevail  in  all,  and  to 
conquer  all  !  By  means  of  truth  to  make  humanity  more 
noble  and  more  happy  ! 

And  it  is  at  this  point,  gentlemen,  that  you,  the  young, 
appear  upon  the  scene.  I  say  the  young,  but  the  term  is 
vague,  distant,  and  deep  as  the  sea,  for  where  are  the  young  ? 
What  will  it — the  young  generation — really  become  ?  Who 
has  a  right  to  speak  in  its  name  ?  I  must  of  necessity  deal 
with  the  ideas  attributed  to  it,  but  if  these  ideas  are  not  at 
all  those  held  by  many  of  you,  I  ask  pardon  in  advance, 
and  refer  you  to  the  men  who  have  misled  us  by  untrust- 
worthy information,  more  in  accord,  no  doubt,  with  their 
own  wishes  than  with  reality. 

At  any  rate,  gentlemen,  we  are  assured  that  your  genera- 
tion is  parting  company  with  ours,  that  you  will  no  longer 
put  all  your  hope  in  Science,  that  you  have  perceived  so 
great  a  social  and  moral  danger  in  trusting  fully  to  her, 
that  you  are  determined  to  throw  yourselves  back  upon  the 
past,  in  order  to  construct,  from  the  debris  of  dead  faiths,  a 
living  faith. 

Of  course,  there  is  no  question  of  a  complete  divorce  from 
Science  ;  it  is  understood  that  you  accept  her  latest  con- 
quests and  mean  to  extend  them.  It  is  agreed  that  you 
will  admit  demonstrated  truths,  and  efforts  are  even  being 
made  to  fit  them  to  ancient  dogmas.  But,  at  bottom, 
Science  is  to  stand  out  of  the  road  of  faith— it  is  thrust  back 
to  its  ancient  rank  as  a  simple  exercise  of  the  intelligence, 
an  inquiry  permitted  so  long  as  it  does  not  infringe  on  the 
supernatural  and  the  hereafter.  It  is  said  that  the  experi- 
ment has  been  made,  and  that  Science  can  neither  repeople 
the  heavens  she  has  emptied  nor  restore  happiness  to  souls 
whose  naive  peace  she  has  destroyed.  The  day  of  her 
mendacious  triumph  is  over  ;  she  must  be  modest  since  she 
cannot  immediately  know  everything,  enrich  everything, 
heal  everything.     And  if  they  dare  not  yet  bid  intelligent 


98  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

youth  to  throw  away  its  books  and  desert  its  masters,  there 
are  already  saints  and  prophets  to  be  found  going  about  to 
exalt  the  virtue  of  ignorance,  the  serenity  of  simplicity,  and 
to  proclaim  the  need  a  too-learned  and  decrepit  humanity 
should  experience  of  recuperating  itself  in  the  depths  of  a 
prehistoric  village,  among  ancestors  hardly  detached  from 
the  earth,  anteceding  all  society  and  all  knowledge. 

I  do  not  at  all  deny  the  crisis  we  are  passing  through — 
this  lassitude  and  revolt  at  the  end  of  the  century,  after 
such  feverish  and  colossal  labour,  whose  ambition  it  was  to 
know  all  and  to  say  all.  It  seemed  that  Science,  which  had 
just  overthrown  the  old  order,  would  promptly  reconstruct 
it  in  accord  with  our  ideal  of  justice  and  of  happiness. 
Twenty,  fifty,  even  a  hundred  years  passed.  And  then, 
when  it  was  seen  that  justice  did  not  reign,  that  happi- 
ness did  not  come,  many  people  yielded  to  a  growing 
impatience,  falling  into  despair,  and  denying  that  by  know- 
ledge one  can  ever  reach  the  happy  land.  It  is  a  common 
occurrence  ;  there  can  be  no  action  without  reaction,  and 
we  are  witnessing  the  fatigue  inevitably  incidental  to  long 
journeys  :  people  sit  down  by  the  roadside — seeing  the  inter- 
minable plain  of  another  century  stretch  before  them,  thejr 
despair  of  ever  reaching  their  destination,  and  they  finish 
by  even  doubting  the  road  they  have  travelled,  and 
regretting  not  to  have  reposed  in  a  field,  to  sleep  for  ever 
under  the  stars.  What  is  the  good  of  advancing,  if  the 
goal  is  ever  further  removed  ?  What  is  the  use  of  know- 
ing, if  one  may  not  know  everything?  As  well  let  us 
keep  our  unsullied  simplicity,  the  ignorant  happiness  of  a 
child. 

And  thus  it  seemed  that  Science,  which  was  supposed  to 
have  promised  happiness,  had  reached  bankruptcy. 

But  did  Science  promise  happiness  ?  I  do  not  believe  it 
She  promised  truth,  and  the  question  is,  whether  one  will 
ever  reach  happiness  by  way  of  truth.  In  order  to  content 
one's  self  with  what  truth  gives,  much  stoicism  will  certainly 
be  needed :  absolute  self-abnegation  and  a  serenity  of  the 
satisfied  intelligence  which  seems  to  be  discoverable  only 
among  the  chosen  few.  But,  meanwhile,  what  a  cry  of 
despair  rises  from  suffering  humanity  !  How  can  life  be 
lived  without  lies  and  illusions  ?  If  there  is  no  other  world 
— where  justice  reigns,  where  the  wicked  are  punished  and 
the  good  are  recompensed — how  are  we  to  live  through  this 


NON-ACTING  99 

abominable  human  life  without  revolting  ?  Nature  is  unjust 
and  cruel,  Science  seems  to  lead  us  to  the  monstrous  law  of 
the  strongest — so  that  all  morality  crumbles  away  and  every 
society  makes  for  despotism.  And  in  the  reaction  which 
results — in  that  lassitude  from  too  much  knowledge  of 
which  I  have  spoken — there  comes  a  recoil  from  the  truth 
which  is  as  yet  but  poorly  explained,  and  seems  cruel  to  our 
feeble  eyes  that  are  unable  to  penetrate  into  and  to  seize  all 
its  laws.  No,  no  !  Lead  us  back  to  the  peaceful  slumber 
of  ignorance  !  Reality  is  a  school  of  perversion  which  must 
be  killed  and  denied,  since  it  will  lead  to  nothing  but  ugli- 
ness and  crime.  So  one  plunges  into  dreamland  as  the  only 
salvation,  the  only  way  to  escape  from  the  earth,  to  feel 
confidence  in  the  hereafter  and  hope  that  there,  at  last,  we 
shall  find  happiness  and  the  satisfaction  of  our  desire  for 
fraternity  and  justice. 

That  is  the  despairing  cry  for  happiness  which  we  hear 
to-day.  It  touches  me  exceedingly.  And  notice  that  it 
rises  from  all  sides  like  a  cry  of  lamentation  amid  the 
re-echoing  of  advancing  Science,  who  checks  not  the  march 
of  her  waggons  and  her  engines.  Enough  of  truth ;  give  us 
chimeras  !  We  shall  find  rest  only  in  dreams  of  the  Non- 
existent, only  by  losing  ourselves  in  the  Unknown.  There 
only,  bloom  the  mystic  flowers  whose  perfume  lulls  our 
sufferings  to  sleep.  Music  has  already  responded  to  the 
call,  literature  strives  to  satisfy  this  new  thirst,  and 
painting  follows  the  same  way.  I  have  spoken  to  you  of 
the  exhibition  at  the  Champ-de-Mars  ;  there  you  may  see 
the  bloom  of  all  this  flora  of  our  ancient  windows — lank, 
emaciated  virgins,  apparitions  in  twilight  tints,  stiff  figures 
with  the  rigid  gestures  of  the  Primitivists.  It  is  a  reaction 
against  Naturalism,  which  we  are  told  is  dead  and  buried. 
In  any  case  the  movement  is  undeniable,  for  it  manifests 
itself  in  all  modes  of  expression,  and  one  must  pay  great 
attention  to  the  study  and  the  explanation  of  it,  if  one  does 
not  wish  to  despair  of  to-morrow. 

For  my  part,  gentlemen,  I,  who  am  an  old  and  hardened 
Positivist,  see  in  it  but  an  inevitable  halt  in  the  forward 
march.  It  is  not  really  even  a  halt,  for  our  libraries,  our 
laboratories,  our  lecture-halls  and  our  schools,  are  not 
deserted.  What  also  reassures  me  is  that  the  social  soil  has 
undergone  no  change  ;  it  is  still  the  democratic  soil  from 
which  our  century  sprang.     That  a  new  art  should  flourish, 

\ 

UNJV£P 


0 


100  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

or  a  new  faith  change  the  direction  in  which  humanity  is 
travelling — that  faith  would  need  a  new  soil  which  would 
allow  it  to  germinate  and  grow  :  for  there  can  be  no  new 
society  without  a  new  soil.  Faith  does  not  rise  from  the 
dead,  and  one  can  make  nothing  but  mythologies  out  of 
dead  religions.  Therefore  the  coming  century  will  but  con- 
tinue our  own  in  the  democratic  and  scientific  rush  forward 
which  has  swept  us  along,  and  which  still  continues.  What 
I  can  concede  is,  that  in  literature  we  limited  our  horizon 
too  much.  Personally,  I  have  already  regretted  that  I  was 
a  sectarian,  in  that  I  wished  art  to  confine  itself  to  proven 
verities.  Later  comers  have  extended  the  horizon  by  recon- 
quering the  region  of  the  unknown  and  the  mysterious  ;  and 
they  have  done  well.  Between  the  truths  fixed  by  science, 
which  are  henceforth  immovable,  and  the  truths  Science 
will  to-morrow  seize  from  the  region  of  the  unknown  to  fix 
in  their  turn,  there  lies  an  undefined  borderland  of  doubt 
and  inquiry,  which,  it  seems  to  me,  belongs  to  literature  as 
much  as  to  science.  It  is  there  we  may  go  as  pioneers,  doing 
our  work  as  forerunners,  and  interpreting  according  to  our 
characters  and  minds  the  action  of  unknown  forces.  The 
ideal — what  is  it  but  the  unexplained  :  those  forces  of  the 
infinite  world  in  which  we  are  plunged  without  knowing 
them  ?  But  if  it  be  permissible  to  invent  solutions  of  what 
is  unknown,  dare  we,  therefore,  call  in  question  ascertained 
laws,  imagining  them  other  than  they  are,  and  thereby 
denying  them  ?  As  science  advances  it  is  certain  that  the 
ideal  recedes  :  and  it  seems  to  me  that  the  only  meaning  of 
life,  the  only  joy  we  ought  to  attribute  to  life,  lies  in  this 
gradual  conquest,  even  if  one  has  the  melancholy  assurance 
that  we  never  shall  know  everything. 

In  the  unquiet  times  in  which  we  live,  gentlemen, — in  our 
day  so  satiated  and  so  irresolute — shepherds  of  the  soul  have 
arisen  who  are  troubled  in  mind  and  ardently  offer  a  faith 
to  the  rising  generation.  The  offer  is  generous,  but,  unfor- 
tunately, the  faith  changes  and  deteriorates  according  to 
the  personality  of  the  prophet  who  supplies  it.  There  are 
several  kinds,  but  none  of  them  appear  to  me  to  be  very 
clear,  or  very  well  defined. 

You  are  asked  to  believe,  but  are  not  told  precisely  in 
what  you  should  believe.  Perhaps  it  cannot  bo  told,  or 
perhaps  they  dare  not  tell  it. 

You  are   to   believe  for  the  pleasure  of  believing,  and, 


NON-ACTING  101 

especially,  that  you  may  learn  to  believe.  The  advice  is  not 
bad  in  itself ;  it  is  certainly  a  great  happiness  to  rest  in  the 
certainty  of  a  faith — no  matter  what  it  may  be  ;  but  the 
worst  of  it  is  that  one  is  not  master  of  this  virtue  :  it 
bloweth  where  it  listeth. 

I,  therefore,  am  also  going  to  finish  by  proposing  to  you  a 
faith,  and  by  beseeching  you  to  have  faith  in  work.  Work, 
young  people  !  I  well  know  how  trivial  such  advice  appears : 
no  speech-day  passes  at  which  it  is  not  repeated  amid  the 
general  indifference  of  the  scholars.  But  I  ask  you  to  reflect 
on  it,  and  I — who  have  been  nothing  but  a  worker — will 
permit  myself  to  speak  of  all  the  benefit  I  have  derived 
from  the  long  task  that  has  filled  my  life.  I  had  no  easy 
start  in  life  ;  I  have  known  want  and  despair.  Later  on  I 
lived  in  strife,  and  I  live  in  it  still — discussed,  denied, 
covered  with  abuse.  Well,  I  have  had  but  one  faith,  one 
strength — work  !  What  has  sustained  me  was  the  enormous 
labour  I  set  myself.  Before  me  stood  always  in  the  distance 
the  goal  toward  which  I  was  marching,  and  that  sufficed  to 
set  me  on  my  feet  and  to  give  me  courage  to  advance  in  spite 
of  all,  when  life's  hardships  had  cast  me  down.  The  work 
of  which  I  speak  to  you  is  the  regular  work,  the  daily  task, 
the  duty  one  has  undertaken,  to  advance  one  step  each  day 
toward  the  fulfilment  of  one's  engagement.  How  often  in 
the  morning  have  I  sat  down  to  my  table — my  head  in  con- 
fusion— a  bitter  taste  in  my  mouth — tortured  by  some  great 
sorrow,  physical  or  moral !  And  each  time — in  spite  of  the 
revolt  my  suffering  has  caused — after  the  first  moments  of 
agony  my  task  has  been  to  me  an  alleviation  and  a  comfort. 
I  have  always  come  from  my  daily  task  consoled — with  a 
broken  heart,  perhaps,  but  erect  and  able  to  live  on  till  the 
morrow. 

Work  !  Reme.mber,  gentlemen,  that  it  is  the  sole  law  of  the 
world,  the  regulator  bringing  organic  matter  to  its  unknown 
goal  !  Life  has  no  other  meaning,  no  other  raison  d'ttre  ; 
we,  each  of  us,  appear  but  to  perform  our  allotted  task  and 
to  disappear.  One  cannot  define  life  otherwise  than  by  the 
movement  it  receives  and  bequeaths,  and  which  is,  in  reality, 
nothing  but  work,  work  at  the  final  achievement  accom- 
plished by  all  the  ages.  And,  therefore,  how  can  we  be 
other  than  modest,  how  can  we  do  other  than  accept  the 
individual  task  given  to  each  of  us,  and  accept  it  without 
rebellion  and  without  yielding  to  the  pride  of  one's  personal 


102  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

'I,'  which  considers  itself  a  centre  and  does  not  wish  to 
take  its  place  in  the  ranks  ? 

From  the  time  one  accepts  that  task,  and  from  the  time 
one  begins  to  fulfil  it,  it  seems  to  me  tranquillity  should 
come  even  to  those  most  tormented.  I  know  that  there  are 
minds  tortured  by  thoughts  of  the  Infinite,  minds  that 
suffer  from  the  presence  of  mystery,  and  it  is  to  them  I 
address  myself  as  a  brother,  advising  them  to  occupy  their 
lives  with  some  immense  labour,  of  which  it  were  even  well 
that  they  should  never  see  the  completion.  It  will  be  the 
balance  enabling  them  to  march  straight ;  it  will  be  a  con- 
tinual diversion — grain  thrown  to  their  intelligence,  that  it 
may  grind  and  convert  it  into  daily  bread,  with  the  satis- 
faction that  comes  of  duty  accomplished. 

It  is  true  this  solves  no  metaphysical  problems  ;  it  is 
but  an  empirical  recipe  enabling  one  to  live  one's  life 
honestly  and  more  or  less  tranquilly  ;  but  is  it  a  small 
thing  to  obtain  a  sound  state  of  moral  and  physical  health, 
and  to  escape  the  danger  of  dreams,  while  solving  by  work 
the  question  of  finding  the  greatest  happiness  possible  on 
this  earth  ? 

I  have  always,  I  admit,  distrusted  chimeras.  Nothing  is 
less  wholesome  for  men  and  nations  than  illusion  ;  it  stifles 
effort,  it  blinds,  it  is  the  vanity  of  the  weak.  To  repose  on 
legends,  to  be  mistaken  about  all  realities,  to  believe  that 
it  is  enough  to  dream  of  force  in  order  to  be  strong — we 
have  seen  well  enough  to  what  terrible  disasters  such  things 
lead.  The  people  are  told  to  look  on  high,  to  believe  in  a 
Higher  Power,  and  to  exalt  themselves  to  the  ideal.  No, 
no  !  That  is  language  which  at  times  seems  to  me  impious. 
The  only  strong  people  are  those  who  work,  and  it  is  only 
work  that  gives  courage  and  faith.  To  conquer  it  is  neces- 
sary that  the  arsenals  should  be  full,  that  one  should  have 
the  strongest  and  the  most  perfect  armament,  that  the  army 
should  be  trained,  should  have  confidence  in  its  chiefs  and 
in  itself.  All  this  can  be  acquired  ;  it  needs  but  the  will 
and  the  right  method.  You  may  be  well  assured  that  the 
coming  century  and  the  illimitable  future  belong  to  work. 
And,  in  the  rising  force  of  Socialism,  does  one  not  already 
see  the  rough  sketch  of  the  social  law  of  to-morrow,  the  law 
of  work  for  all — liberating  and  pacifying  work  ? 

Young  men,  young  men,  take  up  your  duties  !  Let  each 
one  accept  his  task,  a  task  which  should  fill  his  life.     It 


NON-ACTING  103 

may  be  very  humble  ;  it  will  not  be  the  less  useful.  Never 
mind  what  it  is,  so  long  as  it  exists  and  keeps  you  erect ! 
When  you  have  regulated  it,  without  excess— just  the 
quantity  you  are  able  to  accomplish  each  day — it  will  cause 
you  to  live  in  health  and  in  .joy  :  it  will  save  you  from  the 
torments  of  the  Infinite.  What  a  healthy  and  great  society 
that  will  be — a  society  each  member  of  which  will  bear  his 
reasonable  share  of  work  !  A  man  who  works  is  always 
kind.  So  I  am  convinced  that  the  only  faith  that  can  save 
us  is  a  belief  in  the  efficacy  of  accomplished  toil.  Certainly 
it  is  pleasant  to  dream  of  eternity.  But  for  an  honest  man 
it  is  enough  to  have  lived  his  life,  doing  his  work. 

Emile  Zola. 

M.  Zola  does  not  approve  of  this  faith  in  something 
vague  and  ill-defined,  which  is  recommended  to  French 
youth  by  its  new  guides  ;  yet  he  himself  advises  belief 
in  something  which  is  neither  clearer  nor  better  defined 
— namely,  in  science  and  in  work. 

A  little-known  Chinese  philosopher,  named  Lao- 
Tsze,  who  founded  a  religion  (the  first  and  best  transla- 
tion of  his  book,  ( Of  the  Way  of  Virtue/  is  that  by 
Stanislas  Julien),  takes  as  the  foundation  of  his  doc- 
trine the  Tao — a  word  that  is  translated  as  '  reason, 
way,  and  virtue/  If  men  follow  the  law  of  Tao  they 
will  be  happy.  But  the  Tao,  according  to  M.  Julien's 
translation,  can  only  be  reached  by  non-acting. 

The  ills  of  humanity  arise,  according  to  Lao-Tsze, 
not  because  men  neglect  to  do  things  that  are  neces- 
sary, but  because  they  do  things  that  are  unnecessary. 
If  men  would,  as  he  says,  but  practise  non-acting,  they 
would  not  merely  be  relieved  from  their  personal 
calamities,  but  also  from  those  inherent  in  all  forms  of 
government,  which  is  the  subject  specially  dealt  with 
by  the  Chinese  philosopher. 

M.  Zola  tells  us  that  all  should  work  persistently  ; 
work  will  make  their  life  healthy  and  joyous,  and  will 
save  them  from  the  torment  of  "the  Infinite.  Work  ! 
But  what  are  we  to  work  at  ?  The  manufacturers  of, 
and  the  dealers  in,  opium,  or  tobacco,  or  brandy — all 
the  speculators  on  the  Stock  Exchange,  the  inventors 


104  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

and  manufacturers  of  weapons  of  destruction,  all  the 
military,  the  gaolers  and  executioners — all  work  :  but 
it  is  obvious  that  mankind  would  be  better  off  were 
these  workers  to  cease  working. 

But  perhaps  M.  Zola's  advice  refers  only  to  those 
whose  work  is  inspired  by  science.  The  greater  part 
of  his  speech  is,  in  fact,  designed  to  uphold  science, 
which  he  thinks  is  being  attacked.  Well,  it  so  happens 
that  I  am  continually  receiving  from  various  unappre- 
ciated authors — pamphlets,  manuscripts,  treatises,  and 
printed  books — the  outcome  of  their  scientific  labours. 

One  of  them  has  finally  solved,  so  he  says,  the  ques- 
tion of  Christian  gnosiology ;  another  has  written  a 
book  on  the  cosmic  ether  ;  a  third  has  settled  the 
social  question  ;  a  fifth  is  editing  a  theosophical  review ; 
a  sixth  (in  a  thick  volume)  has  solved  the  problem  of 
the  Knight's  tour  at  chess. 

All  these  people  work  assiduously,  and  work  in  the 
name  of  science,  but  I  do  not  think  I  am  mistaken  in 
saying  that  my  correspondents'  time  and  work,  and  the 
time  and  work  of  many  other  such  people,  have  been 
spent  in  a  way  not  merely  useless,  but  even  harmful  ; 
for  thousands  of  men  are  engaged  making  the  paper, 
casting  the  type,  and  manufacturing  the  presses  needed 
to  print  their  books,  and  to  feed,  clothe,  and  house  all 
these  scientific  workers. 

Work  for  science  ?  But  the  word  '  science '  has  so 
large  and  so  ill-defined  a  meaning  that  what  some  con- 
sider science  others  consider  futile  folly  ;  and  this  is  so, 
not  merely  among  the  profane,  but  even  among  men 
who  are  themselves  priests  of  science.  While  one  set 
of  the  learned  esteem  jurisprudence,  philosophy,  and 
even  theology,  to  be  the  most  necessary  and  important 
of  sciences,  the  Positivists  consider  just  those  very 
sciences  to  be  childish  twaddle  devoid  of  scientific 
value.  And,  vice  versa,  what  the  Positivists  hold  to  be 
the  science  of  sciences,  sociology,  is  regarded  by  the 
theologians,  the  philosophers,  and  the  spiritualists,  as  a 
collection  of  arbitrary  and  useless  observations  and 
assertions.     More  than  this,  even  in  one  and  the  same 


NON-ACTING  105 

branch,  whether  it  be  philosophy  or  natural  science, 
each  system  has  its  ardent  defenders  and  opponents, 
just  as  ardent,  equally  competent,  though  maintaining 
diametrically  opposite  views. 

Lastly,  does  not  each  year  produce  its  new  scientific 
discoveries,  which,  after  astonishing  the  boobies  of  the 
whole  world,  and  bringing  fame  and  fortune  to  the 
inventors,  are  eventually  admitted  to  be  ridiculous  mis- 
takes, even  by  those  who  promulgated  them  ? 

We  all  know  that  what  the  Romans  valued  as  the 
greatest  science  and  the  most  important  occupation — 
that  which  distinguished  them  from  the  barbarians — 
was  rhetoric,  which  now  does  not  even  rank  as  a  science 
at  all.  Equally  difficult  is  it  to-day  to  understand  the 
state  of  mind  of  the  learned  men  of  the  Middle  Ages, 
who  were  fully  convinced  that  all  science  was  concen- 
trated in  scholasticism. 

Unless,  then,  our  century  forms  an  exception  (which 
is  a  supposition  we  have  no  right  to  make),  it  needs  no 
great  boldness  to  conclude,  by  analogy,  that  among 
the  kinds  of  knowledge  occupying  the  attention  of  our 
learned  men,  and  called  science,  there  must  necessarily 
be  some  which  will  be  regarded  by  our  descendants 
much  as  we  now  regard  the  rhetoric  of  the  ancients  and 
the  scholasticism  of  the  Middle  Ages. 


M.  Zola's  speech  is  chiefly  directed  against  certain 
leaders  who  are  persuading  the  young  generation  to 
return  to  religious  beliefs ;  for  M.  Zola,  as  champion 
of  science,  considers  himself  an  adversary  of  theirs. 
Really  he  is  nothing  of  the  sort,  for  his  reasoning  rests 
on  the  same  basis  as  that  of  his  opponents,  namely  (as 
he  himself  admits),  on  faith. 

It  is  a  generally  accepted  opinion  that  religion  and 
science  are  opposed  to  one  another.  And  they  really 
are  so,  but  only  in  point  of  time  ;  that  is  to  say,  that 
what  is  considered  science  by  one  generation  often 
becomes    religion    for    their    descendants.     What    is 


106  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

usually  spoken  of  as  religion  is  generally  the  science 
of  the  past,,  while  what  is  called  science  is,  to  a  great 
extent,  the  religion  of  the  present. 

We  say  that  the  assertions  of  the  Hebrews  that  the 
world  was  created  in  six  days  ;  that  sons  would  be 
punished  for  their  father's  sins ;  that  certain  diseases 
could  be  cured  by  the  sight  of  a  serpent,  were  religious 
statements  ;  while  the  assertions  of  our  contemporaries 
that  the  world  created  itself  by  turning  round  a  centre 
which  is  everywhere,  that  all  the  different  species  arose 
from  the  struggle  for  existence,  that  criminals  are  the 
product  of  heredity,  that  micro-organisms,  shaped  like 
commas,  exist,  which  cause  certain  diseases — we  call 
scientific  statements.  By  reverting  in  imagination  to 
the  state  of  mind  of  an  ancient  Hebrew,  it  becomes 
easy  to  see  that  for  him  the  creation  of  the  world  in  six 
days,  the  serpent  that  cured  diseases,  etc.,  were  state- 
ments of  science  in  accord  with  its  highest  stage  of 
development,  just  as  the  Darwinian  law,  Koch's  commas, 
heredity,  etc.,  are  for  a  man  of  our  day. 

And  just  as  the  Hebrew  believed  not  so  much  in  the 
creation  of  the  world  in  six  days,  in  the  serpent  that 
healed  certain  diseases,  etc.,  as  in  the  infallibility  of 
his  priests,  and,  therefore,  in  all  that  they  told  him — 
so  to-day  the  great  majority  of  cultured  people  believe, 
not  in  the  formation  of  the  world  by  rotation,  nor 
in  heredity,  nor  in  the  comma  bacilli,  but  in  the 
infallibility  of  the  secular  priests,  called  scientists,  who, 
with  an  assurance  equal  to  that  of  the  Hebrew  priests, 
assert  whatever  they  pretend  to  know. 

I  will  even  go  so  far  as  to  say  that  if  the  ancient 
priests,  controlled  by  none  but  their  own  colleagues, 
allowed  themselves  at  times  to  diverge  from  the  path  of 
truth  merely  for  the  pleasure  of  astonishing  and  mysti- 
fying their  public,  our  modern  priests  of  science  do 
much  the  same  thing,  and  do  it  with  equal  effrontery. 

The  greater  part  of  what  is  called  religion  is  simply 
the  superstition  of  past  ages  ;  the  greater  part  of  what 
is  called  science  is  nothing  but  the  superstition  of 
to-day.     And  I  suppose  that  the  proportion  of  error 


NON-ACTING  107 

and  of  truth  is  much  about  the  same  in  the  one  as  in 
the  other.  Consequently,  to  work  in  the  name  of  a 
faith,  whether  religious  or  scientific,  is  not  merely  a 
doubtful  method  of  helping  humanity,  but  is  a 
dangerous  method  which  may  do  more  harm  than  good. 

To  consecrate  one's  life  to  the  fulfilment  of  duties 
imposed  by  religion — prayers,  communions,  alms — or, 
on  the  other  hand,  to  devote  it,  as  M.  Zola  advises,  to 
some  scientific  work,  is  to  run  too  great  a  risk  :  for  on 
the  brink  of  death  one  may  find  that  the  religious  or 
scientific  principle  to  whose  service  one  has  consecrated 
one's  whole  life  was  all  a  ridiculous  error  ! 

Even  before  reading  the  speech  in  which  M.  Zola 
extols  work  of  any  kind  as  a  merit,  I  was  always  sur- 
prised by  the  opinion,  especially  prevalent  in  Western 
Europe,  that  work  is  a  kind  of  virtue.  It  always 
seemed  to  me  that  only  an  irrational  being,  such  as  the 
ant  of  the  fable,  could  be  excused  for  exalting  work  to 
the  rank  of  a  virtue,  and  boasting  of  it.  M.  Zola 
assures  us  that  work  makes  men  kind  ;  I  have  always 
observed  the  contrary.  Not  to  speak  of  selfish  work, 
aiming  at  the  profit  or  fame  of  the  worker,  which  is 
always  bad ;  self-conscious  work,  the  pride  of  work, 
makes  not  only  ants,  but  men,  cruel.  Who  does  not 
know  those  men,  inaccessible  to  truth  or  to  kindliness, 
who  are  always  so  busy  that  they  never  have  time 
either  to  do  good  or  even  to  ask  themselves  whether 
their  work  is  not  harmful  ?  You  say  to  such  people, 
e  Your  work  is  useless,  perhaps  even  harmful.  Here 
are  the  reasons ;  pause  awhile ;  let  us  examine  the 
matter/  They  will  not  listen  to  you,  but  scornfully 
reply,  '  It's  ali  very  well  for  you,  who  have  nothing  to 
do,  to  argue,  but  "have  I  time  for  discussions  ?  I  have 
worked  all  my  life,  and  work  does  not  wait ;  I  have  to 
edit  a  daily  paper,  with  half  a  million  subscribers  ;  I 
have  to  organize  the  army  ;  I  have  to  build  the  Eiffel 
Tower,  to  arrange  the  Chicago  Exhibition,  to  pierce  the 
Isthmus  of  Panama,  to  investigate  the  problem  of 
heredity,  or  of  telepathy,  or  of  how  many  times  this 
classical  author  has  used  such  and  such  words/ 


108  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

The  most  cruel  of  men — the  Neros,  the  Peter  the 
Greats — were  constantly  occupied,  never  remaining" 
for  a  moment  at  their  own  disposal  without  activity 
or  amusement. 

Even  if  work  be  not  a  vice,  it  can  from  no  point 
of  view  be  considered  a  virtue. 

Work  can  no  more  be  considered  a  virtue  than 
nutrition.  Work  is  a  necessity,  to  be  deprived  of 
which  involves  suffering,  and  to  raise  it  to  the  rank  of 
a  merit  is  as  monstrous  as  it  would  be  to  do  the  same 
for  nutrition.  The  strange  value  our  society  attaches  to 
work  can  only  be  explained  as  a  reaction  from  the  view 
held  by  our  ancestors,  who  thought  idleness  an  attribute 
of  nobility,  and  almost  a  merit,  as  indeed  it  is  still 
regarded  by  some  rich  and  uneducated  people  to-day. 

Work,  the  exercise  of  our  organs,  cannot  be  a  merit, 
because  it  is  a  necessity  for  every  man  and  every  animal 
— as  is  shown  alike  by  the  capers  of  a  tethered  calf  and 
by  the  silly  exercises  to  which  rich  and  well-fed  people 
among  ourselves  are  addicted,  who  find  no  more  reason- 
able or  useful  employment  for  their  mental  faculties 
than  reading  newspapers  and  novels,  or  playing  chess 
or  cards,  nor  for  their  muscles  than  gymnastics, 
fencing,  lawn-tennis,  and  racing. 

In  my  opinion,  not  only  is  work  not  a  virtue,  but  in 
our  ill-organized  society  it  is  often  a  moral  anaesthetic, 
like  tobacco,  wine,  and  other  means  of  stupefying  and 
blinding  one's  self  to  the  disorder  and  emptiness  of  our 
lives  ;  and  it  is  just  as  such  that  M.  Zola  recommends 
it  to  young  people. 

Dumas  says  something  quite  different. 

in. 
The  following  is  the  letter  he  sent  to  the  editor  of 
the  Gaulois : 

Dear  Sir, 

You  ask  my  opinion  of  the  aspirations  which  seem 
to  be  arising  among  the  students  in  the  schools,  and  of  the 
polemics  which  preceded  and  followed  the  incidents  at  the 
Sorbonne. 


NON-ACTING  109 

I  should  prefer  not  to  express  my  opinion  further  on  any 
matter  whatever.  Those  who  were  of  our  opinion  will  con- 
tinue to  be  so  for  some  time  yet ;  those  who  held  other 
views  will  cling  to  them  more  and  more  tenaciously.  It 
would  be  better  to  have  no  discussions.  '  Opinions  are  like 
nails, '  said  a  moralist,  a  friend  of  mine :  *  the  more  one 
hits  them  the  more  one  drives  them  in.' 

It  is  not  that  I  have  no  opinion  on  what  one  calls  the 
great  questions  of  life,  and  on  the  diverse  forms  in  which 
the  mind  of  man  momentarily  clothes  the  subjects  of  which 
it  treats.  Rather,  that  opinion  is  so  correct  and  absolute, 
that  I  prefer  to  keep  it  for  my  own  guidance,  having  no 
ambition  to  create  anything,  or  to  destroy  anything.  I 
should  have  to  go  back  to  great  political,  social,  philo- 
sophical and  religious  problems,  and  that  would  take  us  too 
far,  were  I  to  follow  you  in  the  study  you  are  commencing 
of  the  small  exterior  occurrences  they  have  lately  aroused, 
and  that  they  arouse  in  each  new  generation.  Each  new 
generation,  indeed,  comes  with  ideas  and  passions  old  as 
life  itself,  which  each  generation  believes  no  one  has  ever 
had  before,  for  it,  for  the  first  time,  finds  itself  subject 
to  their  influence,  and  is  convinced  it  is  about  to  change  the 
aspect  of  everything. 

Humanity  for  thousands  of  years  has  been  trying  to  solve 
that  great  problem  of  cause  and  effect,  which  will,  perhaps, 
take  thousands  of  years  yet  to  settle,  if,  indeed  (as  I  think 
it  should  be),  it  is  ever  settled.  Of  this  problem  children 
of  twenty  declare  that  they  have  an  irrefutable  solution  in 
their  quite  young  heads.  And  as  a  first  argument,  at  the 
first  discussion,  one  sees  them  hitting  those  who  do  not 
share  their  opinions.  Are  we  to  conclude  that  this  is  a  sign 
that  a  whole  society  is  readopting  the  religious  ideal,  which 
has  been  temporarily  obscured  and  abandoned  ?  Or  is  it 
not,  with  all  these  young  apostles,  simply  a  physiological 
question  of  warm  blood  and  vigorous  muscles,  such  as  threw 
the  young  generation  of  twenty  years  ago  into  the  opposite 
movement  ?     I  incline  to  the  latter  supposition. 

He  would  indeed  be  foolish,  who  in  these  manifestations 
of  an  exuberant  period  of  life  found  proof  of  development 
that  was  final,  or  even  durable.  There  is  in  it  nothing 
more  than  an  attack  of  growing  fever.  Whatever  the  ideas 
may  be,  for  the  sake  of  which  these  young  people  have  been 
hitting  one  another,  we  may  safely  wager  that  they  will 


110  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

resist  them  at  some  future  day,  if  their  own  children  repro- 
duce them.  Age  and  experience  will  have  come  by  that 
time. 

Sooner  or  later  many  of  these  combatants  and  adversaries 
of  to-day  will  meet  on  the  cross-roads  of  life,  somewhat 
wearied,  somewhat  dispirited  by  their  struggle  with  realities, 
and  hand-in-hand  will  find  their  way  back  to  the  main  road, 
regretfully  acknowledging  that,  in  spite  of  all  their  early 
convictions,  the  world  remains  round,  and  continues  always 
turning  in  one  and  the  same  direction,  and  that  the  same 
horizons  ever  reappear  under  the  same  infinite  and  fixed 
sky.  After  having  disputed  and  fought  to  their  hearts' 
content,  some  in  the  name  of  faith,  others  in  the  name  of 
science,  both  to  prove  there  is  a  God,  and  to  prove  there  is 
no  God  (two  propositions  about  which  one  might  fight  for 
ever  should  it  be  decided  not  to  disarm  till  the  case  was 
proven),  they  will  finally  discover  that  the  one  knows  no 
more  about  it  than  the  other,  but  that  what  they  may  all 
be  sure  of  is,  that  man  needs  hope  as  much  if  not  more  than 
he  needs  knowledge — that  he  suffers  abominably  from  the 
uncertainty  he  is  in  concerning  the  things  of  most  interest 
to  him,  that  he  is  ever  in  quest  of  a  better  state  than  that 
in  which  he  now  exists,  and  that  he  should  be  left  at  full 
liberty,  especially  in  the  realms  of  philosophy,  to  seek  this 
happier  condition. 

He  sees  around  him  a  universe  which  existed  before  he 
did,  and  will  last  after  he  is  gone  ;  he  feels  and  knows  it 
to  be  eternal,  and  in  its  duration  he  would  like  to  share. 
From  the  moment  he  was  called  to  life  he  demanded  his 
share  of  the  permanent  life  that  surrounds  him,  raises  him, 
mocks  him,  and  destroys  him.  Now  that  he  has  begun  he 
does  not  wish  to  end.  He  loudly  demands,  and  in  low  tones 
pleads  for,  a  certainty  which  ever  evades  him — fortunately, 
since  certain  knowledge  would  mean  for  him  immobility 
and  death,  for  the  most  powerful  motor  of  human  energv  is 
uncertainty.  And  as  he  cannot  reach  certainty,  he  wanders 
to  and  fro  in  the  vague  ideal ;  and  whatever  excursions  he 
may  make  into  scepticism  and  negation,  whether  from  pride, 
curiosity,  anger,  or  for  fashion's  sake,  he  ever  returns  to  the 
hope  he  certainly  cannot  forego.  Like  lovers'  quarrels, 
it  is  not  for  long. 

So  there  are,  at  times,  obscurations,  but  never  any  com- 
plete obliteration  of  the  human  ideal.     Philosophical  mists 


NON-ACTING  111 

pass  over  it,  like  clouds  that  pass  before  the  moon  ;  but  the 
white  orb,  continuing  its  course,  suddenly  reappears  from 
behind  them  intact  and  shining.  Man's  irresistible  need  of 
an  ideal  explains  why  he  has  accepted  with  such  confidence, 
such  rapture,  and  without  reason's  control,  the  various 
religious  formulas  which,  while  promising  him  the  Infinite, 
have  presented  it  to  him  conformably  with  his  nature, 
enclosing  it  in  the  limits  always  necessary  even  to  the  ideal. 

But  for  centuries  past,  and  especially  during  the  last 
hundred  years,  at  each  new  stage,  new  men,  more  and  more 
numerous,  emerge  from  the  darkness,  and  in  the  name  of 
reason,  science,  or  observation,  dispute  the  old  truths, 
declare  them  to  be  relative,  and  wish  to  destroy  the  formulas 
which  contain  them. 

Who  is  in  the  right  in  this  dispute  ?  All  are  right  while 
they  seek  ;  none  are  right  when  they  begin  to  threaten. 
Between  truth,  which  is  the  aim,  and  free  inquiry,  to  which 
all  have  a  right,  force  is  quite  out  of  place,  notwithstanding 
celebrated  examples  to  the  contrary.  Force  merely  drives 
further  back  that  at  which  we  aim.  It  is  not  merely  cruel, 
it  is  also  useless,  and  that  is  the  worst  of  faults  in  all  that 
concerns  civilization.  No  blows,  however  forcibly  delivered, 
will  ever  prove  the  existence  or  the  non-existence  of  God. 

To  conclude,  or,  rather,  to  come  to  an  end, — seeing  that 
the  Power,  whatever  it  be,  that  created  the  world  (which,  I 
think,  certainly  cannot  have  created  itself)  has,  for  the 
present,  while  using  us  as  its  instruments,  reserved  to  itself 
the  privilege  of  knowing  why  it  has  made  us  and  whither  it 
is  leading  us — seeing  that  this  Power  (in  spite  of  all  inten- 
tions attributed  to  it,  in  spite  of  all  the  demands  made  upon 
it)  appears  ever  more  and  more  determined  to  guard  its  own 
secret — I  believe,  if  I  may  say  all  I  think,  that  mankind  is 
beginning  to  cease  to  try  to  penetrate  that  eternal  mystery. 
Mankind  went  to  religions,  which  proved  nothing,  for  they 
differed  among  themselves  ;  it  went  to  philosophies,  which 
revealed  no  more,  for  they  contradicted  one  another  ;  and  it 
will  now  try  to  find  its  way  out  of  the  difficulty  by  itself, 
trusting  to  its  own  instinct  and  its  own  simple  good  sense  ; 
and  since  mankind  finds  itself  here  on  earth  without  knowing 
why  or  how,  it  is  going  to  try  to  be  as  happy  as  it  can  with 
just  those  means  the  earth  supplies. 

Zola  recently,  in  a  remarkable  address  to  students,  recom- 
mended to  them  work  as  a  remedy,  and  even  as  a  panacea, 


112  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

for  all  the  ills  of  life.  Labor  improbus  omnia  vincit.  The 
remedy  is  familiar,  nor  is  it  less  good  on  that  account ,  but  it 
is  not,  never  has  been,  and  never  will  be,  sufficient.  Whether 
he  works  with  limbs  or  brain,  man  must  have  some  other 
aim  than  that  of  gaining  his  bread,  making  a  fortune,  or 
becoming  famous.  Those  who  confine  themselves  to  such 
aims  feel,  even  when  they  have  gained  their  object,  that 
something  is  still  lacking,  for  no  matter  what  we  may  say, 
or  what  we  may  be  told,  man  has  not  only  a  body  to  be 
nourished,  an  intelligence  to  be  cultivated  and  developed, 
but  also,  assuredly,  a  soul  to  be  satisfied.  That  soul,  too,  i3 
incessantly  at  work,  ever  evolving  toward  light  and  truth. 
And  so  long  as  it  has  not  reached  full  light  and  conquered 
the  whole  truth,  it  will  continue  to  torment  man. 

Well!  The  soul  never  so  harassed  man,  never  so  dominated 
him,  as  it  does  to-day.  It  is  as  though  it  were  in  the  air  we 
all  breathe.  The  few  isolated  souls  that  had  separately  de- 
sired the  regeneration  of  society  have,  little  by  little,  sought 
one  another  out,  beckoned  one  another,  drawn  nearer,  united, 
comprehended  one  another,  and  formed  a  group,  a  centre  of 
attraction,  toward  which  others  now  fly  from  the  four 
quarters  of  the  globe,  like  larks  toward  a  mirror.  They 
have,  as  it  were,  formed  one  collective  soul,  so  that  men,  in 
future,  may  realize  together,  consciously  and  irresistibly, 
the  approaching  union  and  steady  progress  of  nations  that 
were  but  recently  hostile  one  to  another.  This  new  soul  I 
find  and  recognise  in  events  seemingly  most  calculated  to 
deny  it. 

These  armaments  of  all  nations,  these  threats  their  repre- 
sentatives address  to  one  another,  this  recrudescence  of 
race  persecutions,  these  hostilities  among  compatriots,  and 
even  these  youthful  escapades  at  the  Sorbonne,  are  all  things 
of  evil  aspect,  but  not  of  evil  augury.  They  are  the  last  con- 
vulsions of  that  which  is  about  to  disappear.  The  social 
body  is  like  the  human  body.  Disease  is  but  a  violent 
effort  of  the  organism  to  throw  off  a  morbid  and  harmful 
element. 

Those  who  have  profited,  and  expect  for  long  or  for  ever 
to  continue  to  profit  by  the  mistakes  of  the  past,  are  uniting 
to  prevent  any  modification  of  existing  conditions.  Hence 
these  armaments,  and  threats,  and.  nersecutions ;  but 
look  carefully  and  you  will  see  that  all  this  is  quite  super- 
ficial.    It  is  colossal,  but  hollow.     There  is  no  longer  any 


NON-ACTING  113 

soul  in  it — the  soul  has  gone  elsewhere  ;  these  millions  of 
armed  men  who  are  daily  drilled  to  prepare  for  a  general 
war  of  extermination,  no  longer  hate  the  men  they  are 
expected  to  fight,  and  none  of  their  leaders  dares  to  proclaim 
this  war.  As  for  the  appeals,  and  even  the  threatening 
claims,  that  rise  from  the  suffering  and  the  oppressed — a 
great  and  sincere  pity,  recognising  their  justice,  begins  at 
last  to  respond  from  above. 

Agreement  is  inevitable,  and  will  come  at  an  appointed 
time,  nearer  than  is  expected.  I  know  not  if  it  be  because 
I  shall  soon  leave  this  earth  and  the  rays  that  are  already 
reaching  me  from  below  the  horizon  have  disturbed  my 
sight,  but  I  believe  our  world  is  about  to  begin  to  realize 
the  words,  'Love  one  another,'  without,  however,  being 
concerned  whether  a  man  or  a  God  uttered  them. 

The  spiritual  movement  one  recognises  on  all  sides,  and 
which  so  many  naive  and  ambitious  men  expect  to  be  able 
to  direct,  will  be  absolutely  humanitarian.  Mankind,  which 
does  nothing  moderately,  is  about  to  be  seized  with  a  frenzy, 
a  madness,  of  love.  This  will  not,  of  course,  happen  smoothly 
or  all  at  once  ;  it  will  involve  misunderstandings — even 
sanguinary  ones  perchance — so  trained  and  so  accustomed 
have  we  been  to  hatred,  even  by  those,  sometimes,  whose 
mission  it  was  to  teach  us  to  love  one  another.  But  it  is 
evident  that  this  great  law  of  brotherhood  must  be  accom- 
plished some  day,  and  I  am  convinced  that  the  time  is 
commencing  when  our  desire  for  its  accomplishment  will 
become  irresistible. 

A.  Dumas. 

June  1,  1893. 

There  is  a  great  difference  between  Dumas'  letter  and 
Zola's  speech,  not  to  mention  the  external  fact  that 
Zola  seems  to  court  the  approval  of  the  youths  he 
addresses,  whereas  Dumas'  letter  does  not  flatter  them, 
nor  tell  them  they  are  important  people  and  that 
everything  depends  on  them  (which  they  should  never 
believe  if  they  wish  to  be  good  for  anything)  ;  on  the 
contrary,  it  points  out  to  them  their  habitual  faults  : 
their  presumption  and  their  levity.  The  chief  difference 
between  these  two  writings  consists  in  the  fact  that 
Zola's  speech  aims  at  keeping  men  in  the  path  they  are 

H 


114  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

travelling,  by  making  them  believe  that  what  they 
know  is  just  what  they  need  to  know,  and  that  what 
they  are  doing  is  just  what  they  ought  to  be  doing — 
whereas  Dumas'  letter  shows  them  that  they  ignore 
what  it  is  essential  for  them  to  know,  and  do  not  live  as 
they  ought  to  live. 

The  more  fully  men  believe  that  humanity  can  be 
led,  in  spite  of  itself,  by  some  external,  self-acting,  force 
(whether  religion  or  science)  to  a  beneficial  change  in 
its  existence — and  that  they  need  only  work  in  the 
established  order  of  things — the  more  difficult  will  it 
be  to  accomplish  any  beneficial  change,  and  it  is  in  this 
respect  chiefly  that  Zola's  speech  errs. 

On  the  contrary,  the  more  fully  men  believe  that  it 
depends  on  themselves  to  modify  their  mutual  relations, 
and  that  they  can  do  this  when  they  like,  by  loving 
each  other  instead  of  tearing  one  another  to  pieces  as 
they  do  at  present — the  more  will  a  change  become 
possible.  The  more  fully  men  let  themselves  be  in- 
fluenced by  this  suggestion,  the  more  will  they  be 
drawn  to  realize  Dumas'  prediction.  That  is  the  great 
merit  of  his  letter. 

Dumas  belongs  to  no  party  and  to  no  religion :  he 
has  as  little  faith  in  the  superstitions  of  the  past  as  in 
those  of  to-day,  and  that  is  why  he  observes  and  thinks, 
and  sees  not  only  the  present  but  also  the  future — as 
those  did  who  in  ancient  times  were  called  seers.  It 
will  seem  strange  to  those  who  in  reading  a  writer's 
works  see  only  the  contents  of  the  book,  and  not  the 
soul  of  the  writer,  that  Dumas — the  author  of  La 
Dame  aux  Camelias,  and  of  V Affaire  Clemenceau — 
that  this  same  Dumas  should  see  into  the  future  and 
should  prophesy.  But,  however  strange  it  may  seem, 
prophecy  making  itself  heard — not  in  the  desert  or  on 
the  banks  of  the  Jordan,  from  the  mouth  of  a  hermit 
clothed  in  skins  of  beasts — but  published  in  a  daily  paper 
on  the  banks  of  the  Seine,  remains  none  the  less  prophecy. 
And  the  words  of  Dumas  have  all  the  characteristics 
of  prophecy  :  First,  like  all  prophecy,  it  runs  quite 
counter  to  the  general  disposition  of  the  people  among 


NON-ACTING  115 

whom  it  makes  itself  heard  ;  secondly,,  those  who  hear 
it  feel  its  truth,  they  know  not  why  ;  and  thirdly,  and 
chiefly,  it  moves  men  to  the  realization  of  what  it  foretells. 

Dumas  predicts  that,  after  having  tried  everything 
else,  men  will  seriously  apply  to  life  the  law  of  brotherly 
love,  and  that  this  change  will  take  place  much  sooner 
than  we  expect.  One  may  question  the  nearness  of 
this  change,  or  even  its  possibility  ;  but  it  is  plain  that 
should  it  take  place  it  will  solve  all  contradictions  and 
all  difficulties,  and  will  divert  all  the  evils  with  which 
the  end  of  the  century  sees  us  threatened. 

The  only  objection,  or  rather  the  only  question,  one 
can  put  to  Dumas  is  this  :  *  If  the  love  of  one's  neigh- 
bour is  possible,  and  is  inherent  in  human  nature,  why 
have  so  many  thousand  years  elapsed  (for  the  command 
to  love  God  and  one's  neighbour  did  not  begin  with 
I  Christ,  but  had  been  given  already  by  Moses)  without 
men,  who  knew  this  means  of  happiness,  having  prac- 
tised it  ?  What  prevents  the  manifestation  of  a  senti- 
ment so  natural  and  so  helpful  to  humanity?  It  is 
evidently  not  enough  to  say,  e  Love  one  another/  That 
has  been  said  for  three  thousand  years  past :  it  is  in- 
cessantly repeated  from  all  pulpits,  religious  or  even 
secular  ;  yet  men  continue  none  the  less  exterminating 
instead  of  loving  one  another  as  they  have  been  bidden 
to  do  for  so  many  centuries.  In  our  day  no  one  any 
longer  doubts  that  if,  instead  of  tearing  one  another  to 
pieces  (each  seeking  his  own  welfare,  that  of  his  family, 
or  that  of  his  country),  men  would  help  one  another  : 
if  they  would  replace  egotism  by  love,  if  they  would 
organize  their  life  on  collectivist  instead  of  on  indi- 
vidualist principles  (as  the  Socialists  express  it  in  their 
wretched  jargon),  if  they  loved  one  another  as  they 
love  themselves,  or  if,  at  least,  they  did  not  do  to  others 
what  they  do  not  wish  to  have  done  to  themselves,  as 
has  been  well  expressed  for  two  thousand  years  past — 
the  share  of  personal  happiness  gained  by  each  man 
would  be  greater,  and  human  life  in  general  would  be 
reasonable  and  happy  instead  of  being,  what  it  now  is, 
a  succession  of  contradictions  and  sufferings. 

h  2 


116  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

No  one  doubts  that  if  men  continue  to  snatch  from 
one  another  the  ownership  of  the  soil  and  the  pro- 
ducts of  their  labour,  the  revenge  of  those  who  are 
deprived  of  the  right  to  till  the  soil  will  not  much 
longer  be  delayed,  but  the  oppressed  will  retake  with 
violence  and  vengeance  all  that  of  which  they  have 
been  robbed.  No  one  doubts  that  the  arming  of  the 
nations  will  lead  to  terrible  massacres,  and  to  the  ruin 
and  degeneration  of  all  the  peoples  enchained  in  the 
circle  of  armaments.  No  one  doubts  that  the  present 
order  of  tilings,  if  it  continues  for  some  dozens  of  years 
longer,  will  lead  to  a  general  breakdown.  We  have 
but  to  open  our  eyes,  to  see  the  abyss  toward  which  we 
are  advancing.  But  the  prophecy  cited  by  Jesus  seems 
realized  among  the  men  of  to-day  :  they  have  ears  that 
hear  not,  eyes  that  see  not,  and  an  intelligence  that 
does  not  understand. 

Men  of  our  day  continue  to  live  as  they  have  lived, 
and  do  not  cease  to  do  things  that  must  inevitably 
lead  to  their  destruction.  Moreover,  men  of  our  world 
recognise,  if  not  the  religious  law  of  love,  at  least  the 
moral  rule  of  that  Christian  principle  :  not  to  do  to 
others  what  one  does  not  wish  done  to  one's  self ;  but 
they  do  not  practise  it.  Evidently  some  greater  reason 
exists  preventing  their  doing  what  is  to  their  advantage, 
what  would  save  them  from  menacing  dangers,  and 
what  is  dictated  by  the  law  of  their  God  and  by  their 
conscience.  Must  it  be  said  that  love  applied  to  life  is 
a  chimera  ?  If  so,  how  is  it  that  for  so  many  centuries 
men  have  allowed  themselves  to  be  deceived  by  this 
unrealizable  dream  ?  It  were  time  to  see  through  it. 
But  mankind  can  neither  decide  to  follow  the  law  of 
love  in  daily  life,  nor  to  abandon  the  idea.  How  is 
this  to  be  explained  ?  What  is  the  reason  of  this  con- 
tradiction lasting  through  centuries?  It  is  not  that  the 
men  of  our  time  neither  wish  nor  are  able  to  do  what 
is  dictated  alike  by  their  good  sense,  by  the  danger!  of 
their  situation,  and  above  all  by  the  law  of  him  whom 
they  call  God  and  by  their  conscience — but  it  is  becanfie 
they  act  just  as  M.  Zola  advises  :  they  are  busy,  they 


NON-ACTING  117 

all  labour  at  some  work  commenced  long  ago  and  in 
which  it  is  impossible  to  pause  to  concentrate  their 
thoughts,  or  to  consider  what  they  ought  to  be.  All 
the  great  revolutions  in  men's  lives  are  made  in  thought. 
When  a  change  takes  place  in  man's  thought,  action 
follows  the  direction  of  thought  as  inevitably  as  a  ship 
follows  the  direction  given  by  its  rudder. 


IV. 

When  he  first  preached,  Jesus  did  not  say,  c  Love 
one  another '  (he  taught  love  later  on  to  his  disciples  : 
to  men  who  had  understood  his  teaching),  but  he  said 
what  John  the  Baptist  had  preached  before  :  repentance, 
fierdvoia — that  is  to  say,  a  change  in  the  conception  of  life. 
MeravoeTre — change  your  view  of  life,  or  you  will  all 
perish,  said  he.  The  meaning  of  your  life  cannot  con- 
sist in  the  pursuit  of  your  personal  well-being,  or  in 
that  of  your  family  or  of  your  nation,  for  such  happi- 
ness can  be  obtained  only  at  the  expense  of  others. 
Realize  that  the  meaning  of  your  life  can  consist  only 
in  accomplishing  the  will  of  him  that  sent  you  into  this 
life,  and  who  demands  of  you,  not  the  pursuit  of  your 
personal  interests,  but  the  accomplishment  of  his  aims 
— the  establishment  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven,  as 
Jesus  said. 

Meravoe'iTe — change  your  way  of  understanding  life,  or 
you  will  all  perish,  said  he,  1,800  years  ago  ;  and  he 
continues  to  repeat  the  same  to-day,  by  all  the  contra- 
dictions and  woes  of  our  time,  which  all  come  from  the 
fact  that  men  have  not  listened  to  him,  and  have  not 
accepted  the  understanding  of  life  he  offered  them. 
MeravoelTe,  said  he,  or  you  will  all  perish.  The  alterna- 
tive remains  the  same  to-day.  The  only  difference  is, 
that  now  it  is  more  pressing.  If  it  were  possible  2,000 
years  ago,  in  the  time  of  the  Roman  Empire,  in  the 
days  of  Charles  V.,  or  even  before  the  Revolution  and 
the  Napoleonic  wars,  not  to  see  the  vanity — I  will  even 
say  the  absurdity — of  attempts  made  to  obtain  per- 
sonal happiness,  family  happiness,  or  national  happi- 


118  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 


ness,  by  struggling  against  all  those  who  sought 
the  same  personal,  family,  or  national  happiness — 
that  illusion  has  become  quite  impossible  in  our  time 
for  anyone  who  will  pause — were  it  but  for  a  moment — 
from  his  occupations,  and  will  reflect  on  what  he  is,  on 
what  the  world  around  him  is,  and  on  what  he  ought  to 
be.  So  that  were  I  called  on  to  give  one  single  piece 
of  advice — the  one  I  considered  most  useful  for  men  of 
our  century — I  should  say  but  this  to  them  :  '  For 
God's  sake,  pause  a  moment,  cease  your  work,  look 
around  you,  think  of  what  you  are,  and  of  what  you 
ought  to  be — think  of  the  ideal/ 

M.  Zola  says  that  people  should  not  look  on  high, 
nor  believe  in  a  Higher  Power,  nor  exalt  themselves  to 
the  ideal.  Probably  M.  Zola  understands  by  the  word 
' ideal'  either  the  supernatural — that  is  to  say,  the 
theological  rubbish  about  the  Trinity,  the  Church,  the 
Pope,  etc. — or  else  the  unexplained,  as  he  calls  the  forces 
of  the  vast  world  in  which  we  are  plunged.  And  in 
that  case  men  would  do  well  to  follow  M.  Zola's  advice. 
But  the  fact  is  that  the  ideal  is  neither  supernatural 
nor  '  unexplained.'  The  ideal,  on  the  contrary,  is  the 
most  natural  of  things ;  I  will  not  say  it  is  the  most 
explained,  but  it  is  that  of  which  man  is  most  sure. 

An  ideal  in  geometry  is  the  perfectly  straight  line 
or  the  circle  whose  radii  are  all  equal ;  in  science  it 
is  exact  truth  ;  in  morals  it  is  perfect  virtue.  Though 
these  things — the  straight  line,  exact  truth,  and  perfect 
virtue — have  never  existed,  they  are  not  only  more 
natural  to  us,  more  known  and  more  explicable  than 
all  our  other  knowledge,  but  they  are  the  only  things 
we  know  truly  and  with  complete  certainty. 

It  is  commonly  said  that  reality  is  that  which  exists  ; 
or,  that  only  what  exists  is  real.  Just  the  contrary  is 
the  case  :  true  reality,  that  which  we  really  know,  is 
what  has  never  existed.  The  ideal  is  the  only  thing 
we  know  with  certainty,  and  it  has  never  existed.  It 
is  only  thanks  to  the  ideal  that  we  know  anything  at 
all  ;  and  that  is  why  the  ideal  alone  can  guide  us  in  our 
lives,  either  individually  or  collectively.    The  Christian 


NON-ACTING  119 

ideal  has  stood  before  us  for  eighteen  centuries  ;  it 
shines,  to-day,  with  such  intensity  that  it  needs  great 
effort  to  avoid  seeing  that  all  our  woes  arise  from  the 
fact  that  we  do  not  accept  its  guidance.  But  the 
more  difficult  it  becomes  to  avoid  seeing  this,  the  more 
some  people  increase  their  efforts  to  persuade  us  to  do 
as  they  do  :  to  close  our  eyes  in  order  not  to  see.  To 
be  quite  sure  to  reach  port  one  must,  above  all,  throw 
the  compass  overboard,  say  they,  and  forge  ahead. 
Men  of  our  Christian  world  are  like  people  who  strain 
themselves  with  efforts  to  get  rid  of  some  object  that 
spoils  life  for  them,  but  who,  in  their  hurry,  have  no 
time  to  agree,  and  all  pull  in  different  directions.  It 
would  be  enough  for  man  to-day  to  pause  in  his  activity 
and  to  reflect — comparing  the  demands  of  his  reason 
and  of  his  heart  with  the  actual  conditions  of  life — in 
order  to  perceive  that  his  whole  life  and  all  his  actions 
are  in  incessant  and  glaring  contradiction  to  his  reason 
and  his  heart.  Ask  each  man  of  our  time  separately 
what  are  the  moral  bases  of  his  conduct,  and  they  will 
almost  all  tell  you  that  they  are  the  principles  of 
Christianity,  or  at  least  those  of  justice.  And  in  saying 
this  they  will  be  sincere.  According  to  their  con- 
sciences, all  men  should  live  as  Christians ;  but  see 
how  they  behave  :  they  behave  like  wild  beasts.  So 
that  for  the  great  majority  of  men  in  our  Christian 
world,  the  organization  of  their  life  corresponds,  not 
to  their  way  of  perceiving  or  feeling,  but  to  certain 
forms  once  necessary  for  other  people  with  quite  dif- 
ferent perceptions  of  life,  but  existing  now  merely 
because  the  constant  bustle  men  live  in  allows  them 
no  time  for  reflection. 


If  in  former  times  (when  the  evils  produced  by  pagan 
life  were  not  so  evident,  and  especially  when  Christian 
principles  were  not  yet  so  generally  accepted)  men 
were  able  conscientiously  to  uphold  the  servitude  of  the 
workers,  the  oppression  of  man  by  man,  penal  law, 


120  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

and,  above  all,  war — it  has  now  become  quite  impos- 
sible to  explain  the  raison  d'etre  of  such  institutions. 
In  our  time  men  may  continue  to  live  a  pagan  life,  but 
they  cannot  excuse  it. 

That  men  may  change  their  way  of  living  and  feeling, 
they  must  first  of  all  change  their  way  of  thinking ; 
and  that  such  a  change  may  take  place,  they  must 
pause,  and  attend  to  the  things  they  ought  to  under- 
stand. To  hear  what  is  shouted  to  them  by  those  who 
wish  to  save  them,  men  who  run  singing  towards  a 
precipice  must  cease  their  clamour  and  must  stop. 

Let  men  of  our  Christian  world  but  stop  their  work 
and  reflect  for  a  moment  on  their  condition,  and  they 
will  involuntarily  be  led  to  accept  the  conception  of  life 
given  by  Christianity — a  conception  so  natural,  so  simple, 
and  responding  so  completely  to  the  needs  of  the  mind 
and  the  heart  of  humanity  that  it  will  arise,  almost  of 
itself,  in  the  understanding  of  anyone  who  has  freed 
himself,  were  it  but  for  a  moment,  from  the  entangle- 
ments in  which  he  is  held  by  the  complications  of  work 
— his  own  and  that  of  others. 

The  feast  has  been  ready  for  eighteen  centuries ; 
but  one  will  not  come  because  he  has  just  bought  some 
land,  another  because  he  has  married,  a  third  because 
he  has  to  try  his  oxen,  a  fourth  because  he  is  building 
a  railway,  a  factory,  is  engaged  on  missionary  sen  ice, 
is  busy  in  Parliament,  in  a  bank,  or  on  some  scientific, 
artistic,  or  literary  work.  During  2,000  years  no  one 
has  had  leisure  to  do  what  Jesus  advised  at  the  begin- 
ning of  his  ministry  :  to  look  round  him,  think  of  the 
results  of  his  work,  and  ask  himself :  What  am  I  ? 
For  what  do  I  exist?  Is  it  possible  that  the  power 
that  has  produced  me,  with  my  reason  and  my  desire 
to  love  and  be  loved,  has  done  this  only  to  deceive  me, 
— so  that,  having  imagined  the  aim  of  life  to  be  my 
personal  well-being — that  my  life  belonged  to  me,  and 
I  had  the  right  to  dispose  of  it  as  well  as  of  the  livw  of 
others,  as  seemed  best  to  me — I  come  at  last  to  the 
conviction  that  this  well-being  (personal,  family,  or 
national)  that  I  aimed  at,  cannot  be  attained,  and  that 


NON-ACTING  121 

the  more  I  strive  to  reach  it,  the  more  I  find  myself  in 
conflict  with  my  reason  and  with  my  wish  to  love  and 
be  loved,  and  the  more  I  experience  disenchantment 
and  suffering  ? 

Is  it  not  more  probable  that,  not  having  come  into 
the  world  by  my  own  will,  but  by  the  will  of  him  who 
sent  me,  my  reason  and  my  wish  to  love  and  be  loved 
were  given  to  guide  me  in  doing  that  will  ? 

Once  this  neravoia  is  acomplished  in  men's  thought, 
and  the  pagan  and  egotistic  conception  of  life  has  been 
replaced  by  the  Christian  conception,  the  love  of  one's 
neighbour  will  become  more  natural  than  struggle  and 
egotism  now  are.  And  once  the  love  of  one's  neigh- 
bour becomes  natural  to  man,  the  new  conditions  of 
Christian  life  will  come  about  spontaneously,  just  as,  in 
a  liquid  saturated  with  salt,  the  crystals  begin  to  form 
as  soon  as  one  ceases  to  stir  it. 

And  in  order  that  this  may  result,  and  that  men  may 
organize  their  life  in  conformity  with  their  consciences, 
they  need  expend  no  positive  effort ;  they  need  only 
pause  in  efforts  they  are  now  making.  If  men  spent 
but  a  hundredth  part  of  the  energy  they  now  devote  to 
material  activities — disapproved  of  by  their  own  con- 
sciences— to  elucidating  as  completely  as  possible  the 
demands  of  that  conscience,  expressing  them  clearly, 
spreading  them  abroad,  and,  above  all,  putting  them 
in  practice,  the  change  which  M.  Dumas  and  all  the 
prophets  have  foretold  would  be  accomplished  among 
us  much  sooner  and  more  easily  than  we  suppose,  and 
men  would  acquire  the  good  that  Jesus  promised  them 
in  his  glad  tidings  :  ( Seek  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven,  and 
all  these  things  shall  be  added  unto  you.' 

[August  9,  o.s.,  1895.] 

This  essay  was  written  first  in  Russian,  and  then  (after 
a  misleading  translation  had  appeared  in  France)  in  French, 
also,  by  Tolstoy.  The  second  version  differed  in  arrange- 
ment from  the  first,  and  has,  at  Tolstoy's  own  request, 
been  relied  upon  in  preparing  the  present  translation. 
In  a  few    places,    however — and    especially  by   including 


122  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

Zola's  speech  and  Dumas'  letter  in  full — the  earlier  version 
has  been  followed. 

Grateful  acknowledgment  is  due  to  the  Oaulois  for  per- 
mission to  reproduce  Dumas'  letter  ;  to  M.  E.  Fasquelle,  of 
the  Bibliotheque  Charpentier,  for  permission  to  reproduce 
Zola's  speech  ;  and  to  Mr.  E.  J.  W.  Warren  for  allowing  his 
excellent  translation  of  Tolstoy's  French  essay  to  be  followed 
in  a  number  of  passages  in  the  present  translation. 


VI 

AN  AFTERWORD  TO  AN  ACCOUNT  RENDERED 
OF  RELIEF  SUPPLIED  TO  THE  FAMINE- 
STRICKEN,  IN  THE  GOVERNMENT  OF 
TOULA,  IN  1891  AND  1892 

Our  two  years'  experience  in  distributing  among  a 
suffering  population  contributions  that  passed  through 
our  hands,  have  quite  confirmed  our  long-established 
conviction  that  most  of  the  want  and  destitution — and 
the  suffering  and  grief  that  go  with  them — which  we, 
almost  in  vain,  have  tried  to  counteract  by  external 
means  in  one  small  corner  of  Russia,  has  arisen,  not 
from  some  exceptional,  temporary  cause  independent  of 
us,  but  from  general  permanent  causes  quite  dependent 
on  us,  and  consisting  entirely  in  the  antichristian,  un- 
brotherly  relations  maintained  by  us  educated  people 
towards  the  poor,  simple  labourers  who  constantly 
endure  distress  and  want  and  the  accompanying  bitter- 
ness and  suffering — things  that  have  merely  been  more 
conspicuous  than  usual  during  the  past  two  years.  If 
this  year  we  do  not  hear  of  want,  cold,  and  hunger — of 
the  dying-off,  by  hundreds  of  thousands,  of  adults  worn 
out  with  overwork  and  of  underfed  old  people  and 
children — this  is  not  because  these  things  will  not 
occur,  but  only  because  we  shall  not  see  them — shall 
forget  about  them,  shall  assure  ourselves  that  they  do 
not  exist,  or  that,  if  they  do,  they  are  inevitable  and 
cannot  be  helped. 

But  such  assurances  are  untrue :  not  only  is  it  pos- 
sible for  these  things  not  to  exist — but  they  ought  not 
[  123  ] 


124  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

to  exist,  and  the  time  is  coming  when  they  will  not 
exist — and  that  time  is  near. 

However  well  the  wine  cup  may  seem  to  us  to  be 
hidden  from  the  labouring  classes — however  artful, 
ancient,  and  generally  accepted  may  be  the  excuses 
wherewith  we  justify  our  life  of  luxury  amid  a  working 
folk  who,  crushed  with  toil  and  underfed,  supply  our 
luxury — the  light  is  penetrating  more  and  more  into 
our  relations  with  the  people,  and  we  shall  soon  appear 
in  the  shameful  and  dangerous  position  of  a  criminal 
whom  the  unexpected  dawn  of  day  exposes  on  the  scene 
of  his  crime.  If  a  dealer  disposing  of  harmful  or 
worthless  goods  among  the  working  folk,  and  trying  to 
charge  as  much  as  possible — or  disposing  even  of  good 
and  needful  bread,  but  bread  which  he  had  bought 
cheap  and  was  selling  dear — could  formerly  have  said 
he  was  serving  the  needs  of  the  people  by  honest  trade  ; 
or  if  a  manufacturer  of  cotton  prints,  looking-glasses, 
cigarettes,  spirits,  or  beer,  could  say  that  he  was  feed- 
ing his  workmen  by  giving  them  employment ;  or  if  an 
official,  receiving  hundreds  of  pounds  a  year  salary 
collected  in  taxes  from  the  people's  last  pence,  could 
assure  himself  that  he  was  serving  for  the  people's  good  ; 
or  (a  thing  specially  noticeable  these  last  years  in  the 
famine-stricken  districts)  if  formerly  a  landlord  could 
say — to  peasants  who  worked  his  land  for  less  pay  than 
would  buy  them  bread,  or  to  those  who  hired  land  of 
him  at  rack-rents — that  by  introducing  improved 
methods  of  agriculture  he  was  promoting  the  prosperity 
of  the  rural  population  :  if  all  this  were  formerly  pos- 
sible, now,  at  least,  when  people  are  dying  of  hunger 
for  lack  of  bread,  amid  wide  acres  belonging  to  land- 
lords and  planted  with  potatoes  intended  for  distilling 
spirits  or  making  starch — these  things  can  no  longer  be 
said.  It  has  become  impossible,  surrounded  by  people 
who  are  dying-out  for  want  of  food  and  from  excess  of 
work,  not  to  see  that  all  we  consume  of  the  product  of 
their  work,  on  the  one  hand  deprives  them  of  what 
they  need  for  food,  and  on  the  other  hand  increases  the 
work  which  already  taxes  their  strength  to  the  utmost. 


AN  AFTERWORD  125 

Not  to  speak  of  the  insensate  luxury  of  parks,  con- 
servatories and  hunting,  every  glass  of  wine,  every  bit 
of  sugar,  butter,  or  meat,  is  so  much  food  taken  from 
the  people,  and  so  much  labour  added  to  their  task. 

We  Russians  are  specially  well  situated  for  seeing 
our  position  clearly.  I  remember,  long  before  these 
famine  years,  how  a  young  and  morally  sensitive  savant 
from  Prague,  who  visited  me  in  the  country  in  winter — 
on  coming  out  of  the  hut  of  a  comparatively  well-to-do 
peasant  at  which  we  had  called,  and  in  which,  as  every- 
where, there  was  an  overworked,  prematurely  aged 
woman  in  rags,  a  sick  child  who  had  ruptured  itself 
while  screaming,  and,  as  everywhere  in  spring,  a 
tethered  calf  and  a  ewe  that  had  lambed,  and  dirt  and 
damp,  and  foul  air,  and  a  dejected,  careworn  peasant — 
I  remember  how,  on  coming  out  of  the  hut,  my  young 
acquaintance  began  to  say  something  to  me,  when 
suddenly  his  voice  broke  and  he  wept.  For  the  first 
time,  after  some  months  spent  in  Moscow  and  Peters- 
burg— where  he  had  walked  along  asphalted  pavements, 
past  luxurious  shops,  from  one  rich  house  to  another, 
and  from  one  rich  museum,  library,  or  palace,  to  other 
similar  grand  buildings — he  saw  for  the  first  time  those 
whose  labour  supplies  all  that  luxury,  and  he  was 
amazed  and  horrified.  To  him,  in  rich  and  educated 
Bohemia  (as  to  every  man  of  Western  Europe,  especially 
to  a  Swede,  a  Swiss,  or  a  Belgian),  it  might  seem 
(though  incorrectly)  that  where  comparative  liberty 
exists — where  education  is  general,  where  everyone  has 
a  chance  to  enter  the  ranks  of  the  educated — luxury  is 
a  legitimate  reward  of  labour,  and  does  not  destroy 
human  life.  He  might  manage  to  forget  the  successive 
generations  of  men  who  mine  the  coal  by  the  use  of 
which  most  of  the  articles  of  our  luxury  are  produced, 
he  might  forget — since  they  are  out  of  sight — the  men 
of  other  races  in  the  colonies,  who  die  out,  working  to 
satisfy  our  whims ;  but  we  Russians  cannot  share  such 
thoughts  :  the  connection  between  our  luxury  and  the 
sufferings  and  deprivations  of  men  of  the  same  race  as 
ourselves  is  too  evident.     We  cannot  avoid  seeing  the 


126  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

f>rice  paid   in  human  lives  for  our  comfort  and  our 
uxury. 

For  us  the  sun  has  risen,  and  we  cannot  hide  what  is 
ohvious.  We  can  no  longer  hide  behind  Government, 
behind  the  necessity  of  ruling  the  people,  behind 
science,  or  art — said  to  be  necessary  for  the  people — or 
behind  the  sacred  rights  of  property,  or  the  necessity 
of  upholding  the  traditions  of  our  forefathers,  etc. 
The  sun  has  risen,  and  these  transparent  veils  no 
longer  hide  anything  from  anyone.  Everyone  sees 
and  knows  that  those  who  serve  the  Government  do  it, 
not  for  the  welfare  of  the  people  (who  never  asked 
them  to  serve),  but  simply  because  they  want  their 
salaries ;  and  that  people  engaged  on  science  and  art 
are  so  engaged,  not  to  enlighten  the  people,  but  for 
pay  and  pensions :  and  that  those  who  withhold  land 
from  the  people,  and  raise  its  price,  do  this  not  to 
maintain  any  sacred  rights,  but  to  increase  the  incomes 
they  require  to  satisfy  their  own  caprices.  To  hide 
this  and  to  lie  is  no  longer  possible. 

Only  two  paths  are  open  to  the  governing  classes — 
the  riqh  and  the  non-workers  :  one  way  is  to  repudiate 
not  only  Christianity  in  its  true  meaning,  but  humani- 
tarianism,  justice,  and  everything  like  them,  and  to 
say  :  '  I  hold  these  privileges  and  advantages,  and, 
come  what  may,  I  mean  to  keep  them.  Whoever 
wishes  to  take  them  from  me  will  have  me  to  reckon 
with.  The  power  is  in  my  hands :  the  soldiers,  the 
gallows,  the  prisons,  the  scourge,  and  the  courts/ 

The  other  way  is  to  confess  our  fault,  to  cease  to  lie, 
to  repent,  and  to  go  to  the  assistance  of  the  people,  not 
with  words  only,  nor — as  has  been  done  during  these 
last  two  years — with  pence  that  have  first  been  wrung 
from  the  people  at  the  cost  of  pain  and  suffering,  but 
by  breaking  down  the  artificial  barrier  existing  between 
us  and  the  working  people,  and  not  in  words  but  in 
deeds  acknowledging  them  to  be  our  brothers  :  altering 
our  way  of  life,  renouncing  the  advantages  and 
privileges  we  possess,  and,  having  renounced  them, 
standing  on   an  equal  footing  with  the   people,  and 


AN  AFTERWORD  127 

together  with  them  obtaining  those  blessings  of 
government,  science,  and  civilization,  which  we  now, 
without  consulting  their  wish,  seek  to  supply  them 
with  from  outside. 

We  stand  at  the  parting  of  the  ways,  and  a  choice 
must  be  made. 

The  first  path  involves  condemning  one's  self  to  per- 
petual falsehood,  to  continual  fear  that  our  lies  may  be 
exposed,  and  to  the  consciousness  that,  sooner  or  later, 
we  shall  inevitably  be  ousted  from  the  position  to  which 
we  have  so  obstinately  clung. 

The  second  path  involves  the  voluntary  acceptance 
and  practice  of  what  we  already  profess  and  of  what 
is  demanded  by  our  heart  and  our  reason — of  what 
sooner  or  later  will  be  accomplished,  if  not  by  us, 
then  by  others — for  in  this  renunciation  of  their  power 
by  the  powerful  lies  the  only  possible  escape  from  the 
ills  our  pseudo-Christian  world  is  enduring.  Escape 
lies  only  through  the  renunciation  of  a  false  and  the 
confession  of  a  true  Christianity. 

[October  28,  o.s.,  1893.] 

This  Afterword,  written  by  Tolstoy  as  a  conclusion  to 
his  Account  relating  to  the  famine  of  1891  and  1892,  was 
suppressed  in  Russia,  and  is  not  contained  in  the  Moscow 
editions  of  his  works,  where  the  rest  of  the  Account  is 
given. 


VII 

RELIGION  AND  MORALITY* 

You  ask  me  :  (1)  What  I  understand  by  the  word 
religion,  and,  (2)  Is  it  possible  to  have  a  morality  inde- 
pendent of  religion,  in  the  sense  in  which  I  understand 
that  word  ? 

I  will  do  my  best  to  answer  these  most  important  and 
excellently-put  questions. 

Three  different  meanings  are  commonly  given  to  the 
word  religion. 

The  first  is,  that  religion  is  a  special  and  true  revela- 
tion given  by  God  to  man,  and  is  a  worship  of  God  in 
aocord  with  that  revelation.  This  meaning  is  given  to 
religion  by  people  who  believe  in  one  or  other  of  the 
existing  religions,  and  who  consequently  consider  that 
particular  religion  to  be  the  only  true  one. 

The  second  meaning  is,  that  religion  is  a  collection 
of  certain  superstitious  beliefs,  as  well  as  a  superstitious 
form  of  worship  that  accords  with  such  beliefs.  This  is 
the  meaning  given  to  religion  by  unbelievers  in  general, 
or  by  such  as  do  not  accept  the  particular  religion  they 
are  defining. 

The  third  meaning  is,  that  religion  is  a  collection  of 
propositions  and  laws  devised  by  wise  men,  and  needed 
to  console  the  common  people,  to  restrain  their  pas- 
sions, and  to  make  the  masses  manageable.  This 
meaning  is  given  to  religion  by  those  who  are  in- 
different to  religion  as  religion,  but  consider  it  a  useful 
instrument  for  Governments. 

*  A  reply  to  questions  put  to  Tolstoy  by  a  German 
Ethical  Society. 

[  128] 


RELIGION  AND  MORALITY  129 

Religion  according  to  the  first  definition  is  a  sure  and 
certain  truth,  which  it  is  desirable  and  even  neces- 
sary for  human  welfare  to  promulgate  by  all  possible 
means. 

According  to  the  second  definition,  religion  is  a 
collection  of  superstitions,  from  which  it  is  desirable 
and  even  necessary  for  human  welfare  that  man  should 
be  emancipated  by  all  possible  means. 

According  to  the  third  definition,  religion  is  a  certain 
useful  appliance,  not  necessary  for  men  of  high  culture, 
but  indispensable  for  the  consolation  and  control  of 
the  common  people,  and  which  must  therefore  be 
maintained. 

The  first  is  like  the  definition  a  man  might  give  of 
music,  who  said  that  music  is  a  particular  tune — the 
one  he  knows  best  and  is  fondest  of ;  and  that  it  ought 
to  be  taught  to  as  many  people  as  possible. 

The  second  is  like  a  definition  given  by  a  man  who 
does  not  understand,  and  consequently  dislikes,  music, 
and  who  says  that  music  is  the  production  of  sounds 
with  one's  throat  or  mouth,  or  by  applying  one's  hands 
to  certain  instruments ;  and  that  it  is  a  useless  and 
even  harmful  occupation  from  which  people  ought  to 
be  weaned  as  quickly  as  possible. 

The  third  is  like  the  definition  of  music  by  a  man 
who  says  it  is  a  thing  useful  for  the  purpose  of  teaching 
dancing,  and  also  for  marching  ;  and  that  it  should  be 
maintained  for  those  purposes. 

The  diversity  and  incompleteness  of  all  these  defini- 
tions arise  from  the  fact  that  they  fail  to  grasp  the 
essential  character  of  music,  and  only  define  some  of  its 
traits,  from  the  definer's  point  of  view.  The  same  is 
true  of  the  three  definitions  given  of  religion. 

According  to  the  first  of  them,  religion  is  something 
in  which  the  definer  rightly  believes. 

According  to  the  second,  it  is  something  in  which, 
according  to  the  definer's  observation,  other  people 
mistakenly  believe. 

According  to  the  third,  it  is  something  the  definer 
thinks  it  useful  to  get  other  people  to  believe  in. 


130  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

In  all  three  cases  the  thing  denned  is  not  the  real 
essence  of  religion,  but  something  people  believe  in 
and  consider  to  be  religion. 

The  first  definition  substitutes  for  the  conception  of 
religion  a  faith  held  by  the  definer  ;  the  second  defini- 
tion substitutes  a  faith  held  by  other  people  :  something 
they  take  to  be  religion — while  the  third  definition  sub- 
stitutes people's  faith  in  something  supplied  to  them  as 
religion. 

But  what  is  faith?  And  why  do  people  hold  the 
faith  they  do  hold?  What  is  faith,  and  how  did  it 
arise  ? 

Among  the  great  mass  of  the  cultured  crowd  of  to- 
day it  is  considered  a  settled  question  that  the  essence 
of  every  religion  consists  in  superstitious  fear,  aroused 
by  the  not-understood  phenomena  of  Nature,  and  in 
the  personification  and  deification  of  these  natural 
forces,  and  the  worship  of  them. 

This  opinion  is  credulously  accepted,  without  criti- 
cism, by  the  cultured  crowd  of  to-day ;  and  not  only 
is  it  not  refuted  by  the  scientists,  but  among  them  it 
generally  finds  its  strongest  supporters.  If  voices  are 
now  and  then  heard  (such  as  that  of  Max  Muller  and 
others)  attributing  to  religion  another  origin  and  mean- 
ing, they  pass  almost  unheard  and  unnoticed  among 
the  common  and  unanimous  acknowledgment  of  religion 
in  general  as  a  manifestation  of  ignorance  and  super- 
stition. Not  long  ago,  at  the  commencement  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  the  most  advanced  men — if  (like 
the  Encyclopaedists  of  the  later  part  of  the  eighteenth 
century)  they  rejected  Catholicism,  Protestantism,  and 
Russo-Greek  Orthodoxy — never  denied  that  religion  in 
general  has  been,  and  is,  an  indispensable  condition  of 
life  for  every  man.  Not  to  mention  the  Deists  (such 
as  Bernardin  de  Saint-Pierre,  Diderot,  and  Rousseau), 
Voltaire  erected  a  monument  to  God,  and  Robespierre 
instituted  a  fete  of  the  Supreme  Being.  But  in  our 
time — thanks  to  the  frivolous  and  superficial  teaching 
of  Auguste  Comte  (who,  like  most  Frenchmen,  really 
believed   Christianity  to  be  the  same  thing  as  Catho- 


RELIGION  AND  MORALITY  131 

licism,  and  saw  in  Catholicism  the  complete  realization 
of  Christianity) — it  has  been  decided  and  taken  for 
granted  by  the  cultured  crowd  (always  eager  and 
prompt  to  accept  the  lowest  view)  that  religion  is  only 
one  special,  long-outlived  phase  in  the  development  of 
humanity,  and  a  hindrance  to  its  further  progress.  It 
is  taken  for  granted  that  humanity  has  passed  through 
two  stages,  the  religious  and  the  metaphysical,  and  has 
now  entered  on  a  third  and  highest  one — the  scientific  ; 
and  that  all  religious  manifestations  among  men  are  mere 
survivals  of  humanity's  spiritual  organ,  which,  like  the 
fifth  toe-nail  of  the  horse,  has  long  lost  all  meaning  or 
importance. 

It  is  taken  for  granted  that  the  essence  of  religion 
lies  in  fear  evoked  by  the  unknown  forces  of  Nature, 
in  belief  in  imaginary  beings,  and  in  worship  of  them, 
as  in  ancient  times  Democritus  supposed,  and  as  the 
latest  philosophers  and  historians  of  religion  assert. 

But,  apart  from  the  consideration  that  belief  in  in- 
visible, supernatural  beings,  or  in  one  such  being,  does 
not  always  proceed  from  fear  of  the  unknown  forces  of 
nature — as  we  see  in  the  case  of  hundreds  of  the  most 
advanced  and  highly-educated  men  of  former  times 
(Socrates,  Descartes,  Newton)  as  well  as  of  our  own 
day,  whose  recognition  of  the  existence  of  a  supreme, 
supernatural  being,  certainly  did  not  proceed  from 
fear  of  the  unknown  forces  of  Nature — the  assertion 
that  religion  arose  from  men^s  superstitious  fear  of  the 
mysterious  forces  of  Nature  really  affords  no  answer  to 
the  main  question,  'What  was  it  in  men  that  gave 
them  the  conception  of  unseen,  supernatural  beings  ?' 

If  men  feared  thunder  and  lightning,  they  feared 
them  as  thunder  and  lightning ;  but  why  should  they 
invent  some  invisible,  supernatural  being,  Jupiter,  who 
lives  somewhere  or  other,  and  sometimes  throws  arrows 
at  people  ? 

Men  struck  by  the  sight  of  death  would  fear  death  ; 
but  why  should  they  invent  souls  of  the  dead  with 
whom  they  entered  into  imaginary  intercourse  ?  From 
thunder  men  might  hide.     Fear  of  death  might  make 

i  2 


132  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

them  try  to  escape  death.  But  if  they  invented  an 
eternal  and  powerful  being  on  whom  they  supposed 
themselves  to  depend,  and  if  they  invented  live  souls 
for  dead  people,  they  did  this  not  simply  from  fear, 
hut  for  some  other  reasons.  And  in  those  reasons, 
evidently,  lay  the  essence  of  the  thing  we  call  religion. 

Moreover,  every  man  who  has  ever,  even  in  child- 
hood, experienced  religious  feeling,  knows  by  personal 
experience  that  it  was  evoked  in  him,  not  by  external, 
terrifying,  material  phenomena,  but  by  an  inner  con- 
sciousness, which  had  nothing  to  do  with  fear  of  the 
unknown  forces  of  Nature — a  consciousness  of  his  own 
insignificance,  loneliness,  and  guilt.  And  therefore, 
both  by  external  observation  and  by  personal  experi- 
ence, man  may  know  that  religion  is  not  the  worship 
of  gods,  evoked  by  superstitious  fear  of  the  invisible 
forces  of  Nature,  proper  to  men  only  at  a  certain  period 
of  their  development ;  but  is  something  quite  inde- 
pendent either  of  fear  or  of  their  degree  of  education 
— a  something  that  cannot  be  destroyed  by  any  develop- 
ment of  culture.  For  man's  consciousness  of  his  finite- 
ness  amid  an  infinite  universe,  and  of  his  sinfulness 
(i.e.,  of  his  not  having  done  all  he  might  and  should 
have  done)  has  always  existed  and  will  exist  as  long  as 
man  remains  man. 

Indeed,  everyone  on  emerging  from  the  animal  con- 
ditions of  infancy  and  earliest  childhood,  when  he  lives 
guided  only  by  the  demands  of  his  animal  nature — 
everyone  on  awakening  to  rational  consciousness,  can- 
not but  notice  that  all  around  him  lives,  renewing 
itself,  undestroyed,  and  infallibly  conforming  to  one, 
definite,  eternal  law  :  and  that  he  alone,  recognising 
himself  as  a  being  separate  from  the  rest  of  the  universe, 
is  sentenced  to  die,  to  disappear  into  infinite  space  and 
endless  time,  and  to  suffer  the  tormenting  conscious- 
ness of  responsibility  for  his  actions — i.e.,  the  con- 
sciousness that,  having  acted  badly,  he  could  have 
done  better.  And  understanding  this,  no  reasonable 
man  can  help  pausing  to  ask  himself,  (  What  is  the 
meaning  of  my  momentary,   uncertain,  and   unstable 


RELIGION  AND  MORALITY  133 

existence,  amid  this  eternal,  firmly  defined  and  unend- 
ing universe  ?'  Entering  on  truly  human  life,  a  man 
cannot  evade  that  question. 

That  question  faces  every  man,  and,  in  one  way  or 
other,  every  man  answers  it.  And  in  the  reply  to  that 
question  lies  the  essence  of  every  religion.  The  essence 
of  religion  consists  solely  in  the  answer  to  the  question, 
(  Why  do  I  live,  and  what  is  my  relation  to  the  infinite 
universe*  around  me  ?' 

All  the  metaphysics  of  religion,  all  the  doctrines 
ahout  deities,  and  about  the  origin  of  the  world,  and 
all  external  worship — which  are  usually  supposed  to  be 
religion — are  but  indications  (differing  according  to 
geographical,  ethnographical,  and  historical  circum- 
stances) of  the  existence  of  religion.  There  is  no 
religion,  from  the  most  elevated  to  the  coarsest,  that 
has  not  at  its  root  this  establishing  of  man's  relation 
to  the  surrounding  universe  or  to  its  first  cause.  There 
is  no  religious  rite,  however  coarse,  nor  any  cult,  how- 
ever refined,  that  has  not  this  at  its  root.  Every  reli- 
gious teaching  is  the  expression  which  the  founder  of 
that  religion  has  given,  of  the  relation  he  considered 
himself  as  a  man  (and  consequently  all  other  people 
also)  to  occupy  towards  the  universe  and  its  origin  and 
first  cause. 

The  expressions  of  these  relations  are  very  numerous, 
corresponding  to  the  different  ethnographical  and  his- 
torical conditions  of  the  founders  of  these  religions, 
and  the  nations  that  adopted  them.  Moreover,  all 
these  expressions  are  variously  interpreted  and  per- 
verted by  the  followers  of  teachers  who  were  usually 
hundreds,  and  sometimes  thousands,  of  years  ahead  of 
the  comprehension  of  the  masses.  And  so  these  rela- 
tions of  man  to  the  universe — i.e.,  to  religion — appear 
to  be  very  numerous,  though,  in  reality,  there  are  only 
three  fundamental  relations  in  which  men  stand  towards 
the  universe  and  its  author.     They  are  :  (1)  The  primi- 

*  '  Universe '  is  used  here  and  elsewhere  in  its  primary 
significance,  embracing  the  totality  of  existing  things, 
spiritual  or  material. 


134  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

tive,  personal  relation  ;  (2)  the  pagan,  social,  or  family- 
State  relation  ;  (3)  the  Christian  or  divine  relation. 

Strictly  speaking  there  are  only  two  fundamental 
relations  in  which  man  can  stand  towards  the  world  : 
the  Personal,  which  sees  the  meaning  of  life  in  personal 
well-being,  obtained  separately,  or  in  union  with  other 
individuals  ;  and  the  Christian,  which  sees  the  meaning 
of  life  to  consist  in  service  of  him  who  sent  man  into 
the  world.  The  second  of  the  three  divisions  men- 
tioned in  the  first  classification — the  social — is  really 
only  an  extension  of  the  first. 

The  first  of  these  perceptions,  the  oldest — now  found 
among  people  on  the  lowest  plane  of  moral  develop- 
ment— consists  in  man  considering  himself  to  be  a  self- 
motived  being,  living  in  the  world  to  obtain  the  greatest 
possible  personal  happiness,  regardless  of  the  suffering 
such  attainment  may  cause  to  others. 

From  this  very  primitive  relation  to  the  world  (a 
relation  in  which  every  infant  lives  on  first  entering  the 
world  ;  in  which  humanity  lived  during  the  first,  pagan, 
period  of  its  development ;  and  in  which  many  of  the 
morally-coarsest  individuals  and  savage  tribes  still  live) 
flowed  the  ancient  pagan  religions,  as  well  as  the  lowest 
forms  of  the  later  religions :  Buddhism,*  Taoism, 
Mohammedanism,  and  Christianity,  in  their  perverted 
forms.  From  this  relation  to  the  world  comes  also 
modern  Spiritualism,  which  has,  at  its  root,  a  desire 
for  the  preservation  and  well-being  of  one's  personality. 
All  the  pagan  cults :  divinations ;  the  deification  of 
beings  who  enjoy  themselves  like  man ;  Saints  who 
intercede  for  man ;   all  sacrifices  and  prayers  offered 

*  Buddhism,  though  demanding  from  its  followers  the 
renunciation  of  worldly  blessings,  and  even  of  life  itself,  is 
based  on  the  same  relation  of  a  self-motived  personality 
(predestined  to  personal  well-being)  to  the  suiTounding 
universe  ;  but  with  this  difference— that  simple  paganism 
considers  man  to  have  a  right  to  happiness,  while  Buddhism 
considers  that  the  world  ought  to  disappear  because  it  pro- 
duces suffering  to  the  personality.  Buddhism  is  negativo 
paganism. 


RELIGION  AND  MORALITY  135 

for  man's  earthly  welfare,  and  for  deliverance  from 
calamities — come  from  this  conception  of  life. 

The  second  form  of  the  pagan  relation  of  man  to  the 
world,  the  social,  which  he  adopts  at  the  next  stage  of  de- 
velopment— a  relation  natural  chiefly  to  adults — consists 
in  seeing  the  meaning  of  life,  not  in  the  welfare  of  one 
separate  individual,  but  in  the  welfare  of  a  group  of  indi- 
viduals :  a  family,  clan,  nation,  empire,  or  even  of  all 
humanity  (as  in  the  Positivisms  attempt  to  found  a 
religion).  y 

In  this  relation  of  man  to  the  world,  the  meaning  of 
life  is  transferred  from  the  individual  to  a  family,  clan, 
nation,  or  empire — to  a  certain  association  of  individuals, 
whose  welfare  is  considered  to  be  the  aim  of  existence. 
From  this  view  come  all  religions  of  a  certain  type — 
the  patriarchal  and  social :  the  Chinese  and  Japanese 
religions  ;  the  religions  of  a  c  chosen  people  ■ — the 
Jewish,  the  Roman  State-religion,  our  Church  and 
State  religion  (improperly  called  Christian,  but 
degraded  to  this  level  by  Augustine),  and  the  proposed 
Positivist  religion  of  Humanity. 

All  the  ceremonies  of  ancestor-worship  in  China  and 
Japan ;  the  worship  of  Emperors  in  Rome ;  the  mul- 
titudinous Jewish  ceremonials  aiming  at  the  preservation 
of  an  agreement  between  the  chosen  people  and  God  ; 
all  family,  social,  and  Church-Christian  prayers  for  the 
welfare  of  the  State,  or  for  success  in  war — rest  on  that 
understanding  of  man's  relation  to  the  universe. 

The  third  conception  of  this  relation,  the  Christian — 
of  which  all  old  men  are  involuntarily  conscious,  and 
into  which,  in  my  opinion,  humanity  is  now  entering — 
consists  in  the  meaning  of  life  no  longer  appearing  to 
lie  in  the  attainment  of  personal  aims,  or  the  aims  of 
any  association  of  individuals,  but  solely  in  serving  that 
Will  which  has  produced  man  and  the  entire  universe, 
not  for  man's  aims  but  for  its  own. 

From  this  relation  to  the  world  comes  the  highest 
religious  teaching  known  to  us,  germs  of  which  existed 
already  among  the  Pythagoreans,  Therapeutae,  Essenes, 
and  among  the  Egyptians,    Persians,    the  Brahmins, 


136  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

Buddhists,  and  Taoists,  in  their  best  representatives, 
but  which  received  its  complete  and  final  expression 
only  in  Christianity,  in  its  true  and  unperverted  mean- 
ing. All  the  ritual  of  those  ancient  religions  that  pro- 
ceeded from  this  understanding  of  life,  and,  in  our  time, 
all  the  external  forms  of  worship  among  the  Unitarians, 
Universalists,  Quakers,  Servian  Nazarenes,  Russian 
Doukhobors,  and  all  the  so-called  rationalistic  sects :  their 
sermons,  hymns,  conferences  and  books,  are  religious 
manifestations  of  this  relation  of  man  to  the  universe. 

All  possible  religions  of  whatever  kind  can,  by  the 
nature  of  the  case,  be  classed  according  to  these  three 
ways  of  regarding  the  universe. 

Every  man  who  has  emerged  from  the  animal  state 
inevitably  adopts  the  first,  or  the  second,  or  the  third, 
of  these  relations,  and  that  is  what  constitutes  each 
man's  true  religion,  no  matter  to  what  faith  he  may 
nominally  belong. 

Every  man  necessarily  conceives  some  relation  be- 
tween himself  and  the  universe,  for  an  intelligent  being 
cannot  live  in  the  universe  that  surrounds  him,  without 
having  some  relation  to  it.  And  since  man  has  as  yet 
devised  but  three  relations  that  we  know  of  to  the 
universe — it  follows  that  every  man  inevitably  holds  one 
of  these  three,  and,  whether  he  wishes  to  or  not,  belongs 
to  one  of  the  three  fundamental  religions  among  which 
the  human  race  is  divided. 

Therefore  the  assertion,  very  common  among  the 
cultured  crowd  of  Christendom,  that  they  have  risen 
to  such  a  height  of  development  that  they  no  longer 
need,  or  possess,  any  religion,  only  amounts  to  this — 
that  repudiating  the  Christian  religion,  which  is  the 
only  one  natural  to  our  time,  they  hold  to  the  lower, 
social,  family,  State  religion,  or  to  the  primitive  pagan 
religion,  without  being  aware  of  the  fact.  A  man 
without  a  religion — i.e.,  without  any  relation  to  the 
universe — is  as  impossible  as  a  man  without  a  heart. 
He  may  not  know  he  has  a  religion,  just  as  a  man  may 
not  know  he  has  a  heart,  but  he  can  no  more  exist 
without  a  religion  than  without  a  heart. 


RELIGION  AND  MORALITY  137 

Religion  is  the  relation  in  which  a  man  acknowledges 
himself  to  stand  towards  the  infinite  universe  around 
him,  or  towards  its  source  and  first  cause  ;  and  a  rational 
man  must  have  some  relation  to  them. 

But  you  will,  perhaps,  say  that  to  define  man's  rela- 
tion to  the  universe  is  not  the  affair  of  religion,  but  of 
philosophy,  or  of  science  in  general,  if  one  includes 
philosophy  as  part  of  science.  I  do  not  think  so.  On 
the  contrary,  I  think  that  the  supposition  that  science 
in  its  widest  sense,  including  philosophy  as  part  of  it, 
can  define  man's  relation  to  the  universe  is  quite 
erroneous,  and  is  the  chief  cause  of  the  confusion  con- 
cerning religion,  science,  and  morality,  which  prevails 
among  the  cultured  classes  of  our  society. 

Science,  including  philosophy,  cannot  define  man's 
relation  to  the  infinite  universe  or  its  source,  were  it 
only  for  this  reason — that  before  any  philosophy  or 
science  could  arise,  that  must  already,  have  existed 
without  which  no  activity  of  thought,  nor  relation 
of  any  kind  between  man  and  the  universe,  is 
possible. 

As  a  man  cannot  by  any  possible  motion  discover  in 
which  direction  he  ought  to  move,  yet  every  movement 
is  necessarily  performed  in  some  direction,  so  also  is  it 
impossible  by  mental  effort  at  philosophy  or  science  to 
discover  the  direction  in  which  such  efforts  should  be 
performed  ;  but  all  mental  effort  is  necessarily  per- 
formed in  some  direction  that  has  been  predetermined 
for  it.  And  it  is  religion  that  always  indicates  this 
direction  for  all  mental  work.  All  known  philosophers, 
from  Plato  to  Schopenhauer,  have  always  and  inevitably 
followed  a  direction  given  them  by  religion.  The 
philosophy  of  Plato  and  his  followers  was  a  pagan 
philosophy,  which  examined  the  means  of  obtaining  the 
greatest  possible  well-being  for  separate  individuals,  and 
for  an  association  of  individuals  in  a  State.  The  Church- 
Christian  philosophy  of  the  Middle  Ages,  proceeding 
from  a  similar  pagan  conception  of  life,  investigated 
ways  of  obtaining  salvation  for  the  individual — that  is, 
ways  of  obtaining  the  greatest  personal  welfare  in  a 


138  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

future  life  ;  and  only  in  its  theocratic  attempts  did  it 
treat  of  arrangements  for  the  welfare  of  society. 

Modern  philosophy,  both  HegePs  and  Comte's,  has 
at  its  root  the  State-social  religious  conception  of  life. 
The  pessimistic  philosophy  of  Schopenhauer  and  Hart- 
mann,  wishing  to  free  itself  from  Judaeo-religious 
cosmology,  involuntarily  adopted  the  religious  basis  of 
Buddhism. 

Philosophy  has  always  been,  and  will  always  be, 
simply  the  investigation  of  the  consequences  that  result 
from  the  relation  religion  establishes  between  man  and 
the  universe,  for  until  that  relation  is  settled  there  is 
nothing  on  which  philosophy  can  work. 

So  also  with  positive  science,  in  the  restricted  mean- 
ing of  the  word.  Such  science  has  always  been,  and 
will  always  be,  merely  the  investigation  and  study  of 
all  such  objects  and  phenomena,  as  in  consequence  of 
a  certain  relation  religion  has  set  up  between  man  and 
the  universe,  appear  to  demand  investigation. 

Science  always  has  been,  and  will  be,  not  the  study 
of  £  everything/  as  scientists  now  naively  suppose  (that 
is  impossible,  for  there  are  an  incalculable  quantity  of 
objects  that  might  be  studied),  but  only  of  such  things 
as  religion  selects  in  due  order  and  according  to  their 
degree  of  importance,  from  among  the  incalculable 
quantity  of  objects,  phenomena,  and  conditions,  await- 
ing examination.  And,  therefore,  science  is  not  one 
and  indivisible,  but  there  are  as  many  sciences  as  there 
are  religions.  Each  religion  selects  a  range  of  objects 
for  investigation,  and  therefore  the  science  of  each 
different  time  and  people  inevitably  bears  the  character 
of  the  religion  from  whose  point  of  view  it  sees  its 
objects. 

Thus  pagan  science,  re-established  at  the  Renaissance 
and  now  flourishing  in  our  society  under  the  title  of 
Christian,  always  was,  and  continues  to  be,  merely  an 
investigation  of  all  those  conditions  from  which  man 
may  obtain  the  greatest  welfare,  and  of  all  such 
phenomena  as  can  be  made  to  promote  tli.it  end.  Brah- 
man  and  Buddhist  philosophic  science  was  always  merely 


RELIGION  AND  MORALITY  139 

the  investigation  of  those  conditions  under  which  man 
escapes  from  the  sufferings  that  oppress  him.  Hebrew 
science  (the  Talmud)  was  always  merely  the  study  and 
explanation  of  the  conditions  which  man  had  to  observe 
in  order  to  fulfil  his  contract  with  God,  and  to  keep  the 
chosen  people  at  the  height  of  their  vocation.  Church- 
Christian  science  has  been,  and  is,  an  investigation  of 
the  conditions  under  which  salvation  can  be  obtained  by 
man.  True  Christian  science,  such  as  is  only  now  being 
born,  is  an  investigation  of  the  conditions  enabling 
man  to  know  the  demands  of  the  Supreme  Will  from 
whence  he  came,  and  how  to  apply  those  demands  to 
life. 

Neither  philosophy  nor  science  can  establish  man's  re- 
lation to  the  universe,  for  that  relation  must  be  estab 
lished  before  any  philosophy  or  science  can  begin.  They 
cannot  do  it  for  this  further  reason — that  science,  includ- 
ing philosophy  as  part  of  it,  investigates  phenomena 
intellectually  —  independently  of  the  investigator's 
position  or  the  feelings  he  experiences.  But  man's 
relation  to  the  world  is  denned  not  by  intellect  alone, 
but  also  by  feeling,  and  by  the  whole  combination  of 
his  spiritual  forces.  However  much  you  may  assure  a 
man,  and  explain  to  him,  that  all  that  truly  exists  is 
only  idea — or  that  everything  consists  of  atoms — or 
that  the  essence  of  life  is  substance,  or  will — or  that 
heat,  light,  movement  and  electricity  are  different 
manifestations  of  one  and  the  same  energy — to  a  being 
that  feels,  suffers,  rejoices,  fears  and  hopes,  it  will  all 
fail  to  explain  his  place  in  the  universe. 

That  place,  and  consequently  his  relation  to  the 
universe,  is  shown  to  him  by  religion,  which  says  to 
him  :  c  The  world  exists  for  you,  therefore  take  from 
life  all  you  can  get  from  it/  or  :  '  You  are  a  member 
of  a  chosen  nation  loved  by  God,  therefore  serve  that 
nation,  do  all  that  God  has  demanded,  and  you  to- 
gether with  your  nation  will  receive  the  greatest  wel- 
fare obtainable,'  or  :  e  You  are  an  instrument  of  the 
Supreme  Will,  which  has  sent  you  into  the  world  to 
perform  an  appointed  task  ;  learn  that  Will  and  fulfil 


140  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

it,  and  you  will  do  for  yourself  the  best  it  is  possible 
for  you  to  do.' 

To  understand  the  statements  of  philosophy  and 
science,  preparation  and  study  are  necessary,  but  for 
religious  comprehension  they  are  not  necessary  :  it  is 
given  to  everyone,  even  to  the  most  limited  and  ignorant 
of  men. 

For  a  man  to  know  his  relation  to  the  world  around 
him  or  to  its  source,  he  needs  neither  philosophic  nor 
scientific  knowledge  (an  abundance  of  knowledge  bur- 
dening the  consciousness  is  rather  a  hindrance),  but  he 
needs,  if  but  for  a  time,  to  renounce  the  cares  of  the 
world,  to  have  a  consciousness  of  his  material  insig- 
nificance, and  to  have  sincerity — conditions  most  often 
met  with  (as  is  said  in  the  Gospels)  among  children  and 
among  the  plainest,  unlearned  folk.  That  is  why  we  often 
see  that  the  plainest,  least-learned,  and  least-educated 
people  quite  clearly,  consciously,  and  easily,  assimilate 
the  highest  Christian  understanding  of  life,  while  very 
learned  and  cultured  men  continue  to  stagnate  in  crude 
paganism.  So,  for  instance,  there  are  most  refined  and 
highly  educated  people  who  see  the  meaning  of  life  in 
personal  enjoyment  or  in  avoidance  of  suffering,  as  did 
the  very  wise  and  highly  educated  Schopenhauer,  or  in 
the  salvation  of  the  soul  by  Sacraments  and  means  of 
grace,  as  highly  educated  Bishops  have  done  ;  while 
an  almost  illiterate  Russian  peasant  sectarian  sees  the 
meaning  of  life,  without  any  mental  effort,  as  it  was 
seen  by  the  greatest  sages  of  the  world  (Epictetus, 
Marcus  Aurelius,  Seneca) — in  acknowledging  one's  self 
an  instrument  of  God's  will,  a  son  of  God. 

But  you  will  ask  me  :  ( What  is  the  essence  of  this 
non-philosophic,  non-scientific  kind  of  knowledge  ?  If 
it  is  neither  philosophic  nor  scientific,  what  is  it  ?  How 
is  it  definable?'  To  these  questions  I  can  only  reply 
that,  as  religious  knowledge  is  that  on  which  all  otner 
knowledge  rests,  and  as  it  precedes  all  other  know- 
ledge, we  cannot  define  it,  for  we  have  no  means 
enaolinir  us  to  do  so.  In  theological  larifriry  this 
knowledge  is  called  revelation,  and,  if  one  does  not 


RELIGION  AND  MORALITY  141 

attach  a  mystic  meaning  to  the  word  (  revelation/  that 
term  is  quite  correct ;  for  this  knowledge  is  not  ob- 
tained by  study,  nor  by  the  efforts  of  one  man  or  of 
many  men,  but  only  by  one  man  or  many  men  accept- 
ing that  manifestation  of  infinite  wisdom,  which  is 
gradually  revealing  itself  to  mankind. 

Why,  10,000  years  ago,  were  people  unable  to 
understand  that  the  meaning  of  life  is  not  limited  to 
the  welfare  of  one's  personality,  and  why  did  a  time 
come  when  a  higher  understanding  of  life — the  family, 
social,  national,  State  understanding  of  life — was  re- 
vealed to  them?  Why,  within  historic  memory,  was 
the  Christian  view  of  life  disclosed  to  men  ?  And  why 
was  it  disclosed  to  this  man  or  that  people  in  particular  ; 
and  why  precisely,  at  such  a  time,  in  one  and  not  in 
another  form?  To  try  to  answer  these  questions  by 
seeking  for  reasons  in  the  historic  conditions  of  the 
time,  life,  and  character  and  special  qualities  of  those 
who  first  made  this  view  of  life  their  own,  and  first 
expressed  it,  is  like  trying  to  answer  the  question, 
'  Why  does  the  rising  sun  light  up  some  objects  before 
reaching  others  P  The  sun  of  truth,  rising  higher  and 
higher  over  the  world,  lights  up  more  and  more  of  it, 
and  is  reflected  first  by  those  objects  which  are  first 
reached  by  its  illuminating  rays,  and  which  are  best 
fitted  to  reflect  them.  But  the  qualities  which  make 
some  men  more  suited  to  receive  the  rising  truth  are 
not  any  special,  active  qualities  of  mind,  but,  on  the 
contrary,  are  passive  qualities  of  heart,  rarely  coin- 
ciding with  great  and  inquisitive  intellect :  renunciation 
of  the  cares  of- the  world,  consciousness  of  one's  own 
material  insignificance,  and  great  sincerity,  as  we  see  ex- 
emplified by  all  the  founders  of  religion,  who  were  never 
remarkable  either  for  philosophic  or  scientific  erudition. 

In  my  opinion  the  chief  mistake,  and  the  one  which 
more  than  any  other  hinders  the  true  progress  of  our 
Christian  branch  of  humanity,  lies  in  the  fact  that  the 
scientists  (who  now  occupy  the  seat  of  Moses) — guiding 
themselves  by  the  pagan  view  of  life  re-established  at 
the   time   of  the   Renaissance,  and  accepting  as  the 


142  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

essence  of  Christianity  something  that  is  really  a  rude 
perversion  of  it — have  decided  that  Christianity  is  a 
condition  humanity  has  outlived,  and  that  the  ancient, 
pagan,  State-social  view  of  life  held  by  them  (one  that 
is  really  worn  out)  is  the  very  highest  understanding 
of  life,  and  the  one  humanity  should  persistently  cling 
to.  Holding  this  view,  they  not  only  do  not  under- 
stand Christianity — that  highest  view  of  life  humanity 
is  approaching — but  they  do  not  even  try  to  under- 
stand it. 

The  chief  source  of  this  misunderstanding  lies  in 
the  fact  that  the  scientists,  parting  company  with 
Christianity  and  recognising  that  their  science  does 
not  accord  with  it,  have  decided  that  the  fault  lies  with 
Christianity  and  not  with  their  science.  That  is  to  say, 
they  are  pleased  to  believe,  not  what  is  really  the  case, 
that  their  science  is  1,800  years  behind  Christianity, 
which  already  influences  a  large  part  of  contemporary 
society,  but  that  Christianity  has  lagged  1,800  years 
behind  science. 

From  this  reversal  of  roles  come  the  astonishing  fact, 
that  no  people  have  a  more  confused  conception  of  the 
essence  and  true  importance  of  religion,  of  morality,  or 
of  life,  than  scientists  ;  and  the  yet  more  astonishing 
fact  that  the  science  of  to-day — while  accomplishing 
really  great  success  in  investigating  the  phenomena  of 
the  material  world — turns  out  to  be  of  no  use  for  the 
direction  of  human  life,  or  even  does  actual  harm. 

And,  therefore,  I  think  that  certainly  it  is  neither 
philosophy  nor  science  that  determines  man's  relation 
to  the  universe,  but  it  is  always  religion. 

So  to  your  first  question,  s  What  do  I  understand  by 
the  word  religion,*  I  reply :  Religion  is  a  relation  man 
sets  up  between  himself  and  the  endless  and  infinite 
universe,  or,  its  source  and  first  cause. 

From  this  answer  to  the  first  question,  the  answer  to 
the  second  follows  naturally. 

If  religion  is  a  relation  man  establishes  towards  the 
universe — a  relation  which  determines  the  meaning  of 
life — then  morality  is  the  indication  and  explanation  of 


RELIGION  AND  MORALITY  143 

such  human  activity  as  naturally  results  from  men 
holding  this  or  that  relation  towards  the  universe. 
And  as  only  two  such  fundamental  relations  are  known 
to  us,  if  we  consider  the  pagan,  social  relation  as  an 
enlargement  of  the  personal  ;  or  three,  if  we  count  the 
social,  pagan  relation  as  a  separate  one — it  follows  that 
but  three  moral  teachings  exist :  the  primitive,  savage, 
personal ;  the  pagan,  family,  State,  or  social ;  and  the 
Christian  or  divine  teaching,  of  service  to  man  or  to 
God. 

From  the  first  of  these  relations  of  man  to  the 
universe  flows  the  teaching  of  morality  common  to  all 
pagan  religions  that  have  at  their  base  the  striving 
after  welfare  for  the  separate  individual,  and  that  there- 
fore define  all  the  conditions  yielding  most  welfare  to 
the  individual,  and  indicate  means  to  obtain  such 
welfare.  From  this  relation  to  the  world  flow  the 
pagan  teachings :  the  Epicurean  in  its  lowest  form ; 
the  Mohammedan  teaching  of  morality,  which  promises 
coarse,  personal  welfare  in  this  and  the  next  world ; 
the  Church-Christian  teaching  of  morality,  aiming  at 
salvation — that  is,  at  the  welfare  of  one's  personality, 
especially  in  the  other  world ;  and  also  the  worldly 
utilitarian  morality,  aiming  at  the  welfare  of  the  indi- 
vidual only  in  this  world. 

From  the  same  teaching,  which  places  the  aim  of  life 
in  personal  welfare,  and,  therefore,  in  freedom  from 
personal  suifering,  flow  the  moral  teaching  of  Buddhism 
in  its  crude  form,  and  the  worldly  doctrine  of  the 
pessimist. 

From  the  second,  pagan  relation  of  man  to  the 
universe,  which  sees  the  aim  of  life  in  securing  welfare 
for  a  group  of  individuals,  flow  the  moral  teachings 
which  demand  that  man  should  serve  the  group  whose 
welfare  is  regarded  as  the  aim  of  life.  According  to 
that  teaching,  personal  welfare  is  only  allowable  to  the 
extent  to  which  it  can  be  obtained  for  the  whole  group 
of  people  who  form  the  religious  basis  of  life.  From 
that  relation  to  the  universe  flow  the  well-known 
Roman  and  Greek  moral  teachings,  in  which  person- 


144  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

ality  always  sacrifices  itself  for  society,  and  also  the 
Chinese  morality.  From  this  relation  flows  also  the 
Jewish  morality — the  subordination  of  one's  own  wel- 
fare to  that  of  the  chosen  people — and  also  the  Church 
and  State  morality  of  our  own  times,  which  demands 
the  sacrifice  of  the  individual  for  the  good  of  the  State. 
From  this  relation  to  the  universe  flows  also  the 
morality  of  most  women,  who  sacrifice  their  whole 
personality  for  the  benefit  of  their  family,  and  espe- 
cially for  their  children. 

All  ancient  history,  and  to  some  extent  medieval  and 
modern  history,  teems  with  descriptions  of  deeds  of 
just  this  family,  social,  or  State  morality.  And  the 
majority  of  people  to-day — though  they  think  their 
morality  is  Christian  because  they  profess  Christianity — 
really  hold  this  family,  State,  pagan  morality,  and 
hold  it  up  as  an  ideal  when  educating  the  young 
generation. 

From  the  third,  the  Christian,  relation  to  the 
universe — which  consists  in  man's  considering  himself 
to  be  an  instrument  of  the  Supreme  Will,  for  the 
accomplishment  of  its  ends — flow  the  moral  teachings 
which  correspond  to  that  understanding  of  life,  elucida- 
ting man's  dependence  on  the  Supreme  Will,  and 
defining  its  demands.  From  that  relation  of  man  to 
the  universe  flow  all  the  highest  moral  teachings  known 
to  man  :  the  Pythagorean,  the  Stoic,  the  Buddhist,  the 
Brahminical,  and  the  Taoist,  in  their  highest  manifesta- 
tions, and  the  Christian  teaching  in  its  real  meaning, 
demanding  renunciation  of  one's  personal  will — and 
not  only  of  one's  own  welfare,  but  even  of  that  of  one's 
family,  society,  and  country — for  the  sake  of  fulfilling 
the  will  of  him  who  sent  us  into  life — a  will  revealed 
by  our  conscience.  From  the  first,  the  second,  or  the 
third  of  these  relations  to  the  infinite  universe  or  to  its 
source,  flows  each  man's  real,  unfeigned  morality,  no 
matter  what  he  may  profess  or  preach  as  morality,  or 
in  what  light  he  may  wish  to  appear. 

So  that  a  man  who  considers  the  reality  of  his  rela- 
tion to  the  universe  to  lie  in  obtaining  the  greatest 


RELIGION  AND  MORALITY  145 

welfare  for  himself — however  much  he  may  say  he  con- 
siders it  moral  to  live  for  his  family,  for  society,  for 
the  State,  for  humanity,  or  for  the  performance  of 
God's  will — and  however  artfully  he  may  pretend  and 
may  deceive  men,  will  still  always  have  as  his  real 
motive  of  action  simply  his  individual  welfare  ;  so  that, 
when  a  choice  has  to  be  made,  he  will  not  sacrifice  his 
own  personality  for  his  family  or  State,  nor  to  do  the 
will  of  God,  but  will  sacrifice  them  all  for  his  own  sake. 
Since  he  sees  the  meaning  of  life  only  in  personal  wel- 
fare, he  cannot  do  otherwise  until  such  time  as  he 
alters  his  relation  to  the  universe. 

And,  similarly,  one  whose  relation  to  life  consists  in 
the  service  of  his  own  family  (as  is  the  case  with  most 
women),  or  of  his  clan  or  nation  (as  among  members  of 
the  oppressed  nationalities,  and  among  men  politically 
active  in  times  of  strife)— no  matter  how  much  he  may 
declare  himself  to  be  a  Christian — his  morality  will 
always  be  family  or  national,  but  not  Christian,  and 
when  any  inevitable  conflict  arises  between  family  or 
social  welfare  on  one  side,  and  that  of  his  personality, 
or  the  fulfilment  of  the  will  of  God,  on  the  other,  he 
will  inevitably  choose  the  service  of  the  group  for 
whom,  in  his  view  of  life,  he  exists  :  for  only  in  such 
service  does  he  see  the  meaning  of  his  life.  And  in 
the  same  way  a  man  who  regards  his  relation  to  the 
world  as  consisting  in  fulfilling  the  will  of  Him  who 
sent  him  hither — however  much  you  may  impress  upon 
him  that  he  should  (in  accord  with  the  demands  of  his 
personality,  or  of  his  family,  his  nation,  empire,  or  all 
humanity)  commit  acts  contrary  to  the  Supreme  Will 
of  which  the  operation  of  the  reason  and  love  where- 
with he  is  endowed  makes  him  aware — will  always 
sacrifice  all  human  ties  rather  than  fail  to  comply  with 
the  Will  that  has  sent  him  here  :  for  only  in  such  com- 
pliance does  he  discern  a  meaning  for  his  life. 

Morality  cannot  be  independent  of  religion,  for  not 
only  is  it  a  consequence  of  religion — that  is,  a  conse- 
quence of  the  relation  in  which  a  man  feels  that  he 
stands  towards  the   universe — but  it  is  implied  (im- 


146  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

pliquee,  as  the  French  say)  in  religion.  Every  religion 
is  an  answer  to  the  question  :  '  What  is  the  meaning  of* 
my  life  ?'  And  the  religious  answer  involves  a  certain 
moral  demand,  which  may  follow  or  may  precede  the 
explanation  of  the  meaning  of  life.  To  the  question, 
'  What  is  the  meaning  of  life  V  the  reply  may  be  :  ' The 
meaning  of  life  lies  in  the  welfare  of  the  individual, 
therefore  make  use  of  all  the  advantages  within  your 
reach ';  or,  'The  meaning  of  life  lies  in  the  welfare  of 
a  certain  group  of  people,  therefore  serve  that  group 
with  all  your  strength  ' ;  or,  ' The  meaning  of  life  lies 
in  fulfilling  the  will  of  Him  that  sent  you,  therefore  try 
with  all  your  strength  to  know  that  will  and  to  fulfil  it.' 
Or  the  same  question  may  be  answered  in  this  way  : 
'The  meaning  of  your  life  lies  in  your  personal  enjoy- 
ment, for  that  is  the  object  of  man's  existence';  or, 
'  The  meaning  of  your  life  lies  in  serving  the  group  of 
which  you  consider  yourself  a  member,  for  that  is  your 
destiny ';  or,  'The  meaning  of  your  life  lies  in  the  ser- 
vice of  God,  for  that  is  your  destiny. 9 

Morality  is  included  in  the  explanation  of  the  mean- 
ing of  life  that  religion  gives,  and  can  therefore  in  no 
way  be  separated  from  religion.  This  truth  is  particu- 
larly evident  in  the  attempts  of  non-Christian  philo- 
sophers to  deduce  a  doctrine  of  the  highest  morality 
from  their  philosophy.  Such  philosophers  see  that 
Christian  morality  is  indispensable,  that  we  cannot  live 
without  it ;  they  even  see  that  it  is  an  already  existing 
fact,  and  they  want  to  find  some  way  to  attach  it  to 
their  non-Christian  philosophy,  and  even  to  put  things 
in  such  a  way  that  Christian  morality  may  seem  to 
result  from  their  pagan  social  philosophy.  That  is 
what  they  attempt,  but  their  very  efforts  show,  more 
clearly  than  anything  else,  that  Christian  morality  is 
not  merely  independent  of  pagan  philosophy,  but  that 
it  stands  in  complete  contradiction  to  that  philosophy 
of  individual  welfare,  or  of  liberation  from  individual 
suffering,  or  of  social  welfare. 

The  Christian  ethics,  which,  in  accord  with  our 
religious  conception  of  life,  we  acknowledge,  demand 


RELIGION  AND  MORALITY  147 

not  only  the  sacrifice  of  one's  personality  for  the  group, 
but  the  renunciation  alike  of  one's  personality  and  of 
one's  group  for  the  service  of  God  ;  but  pagan  philo- 
sophy only  investigates  means  of  obtaining  the  greatest 
welfare  for  the  individual,  or  for  the  group  of  indi- 
viduals, and  therefore  a  contrast  is  inevitable.  And 
there  is  only  one  way  of  hiding  this  contrast — viz., 
by  piling  up  abstract  conditional  conceptions  one  on 
the  top  of  another,  and  keeping  to  the  misty  domain  of 
metaphysics. 

That  is  what  most  of  the  post-Renaissance  philo- 
sophers have  done,  and  to  this  circumstance  —  the 
impossibility  of  making  the  demands  of  Christian 
morality  (which  have  been  admitted  in  advance)  accord 
with  a  philosophy  built  on  pagan  foundations — must  be 
attributed  the  terrible  unreality,  obscurity,  unintelligi- 
bility,  and  estrangement  from  life,  that  characterizes 
modern  philosophy.  With  the  exception  of  Spinoza 
(whose  philosophy,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  he  did  not 
consider  himself  a  Christian,  develops  from  truly  Chris- 
tian roots)  and  Kant  (a  man  of  genius,  who  admittedly 
treated  his  system  of  ethics  as  not  dependent  on  his 
metaphysics),  all  the  other  philosophers,  even  the 
brilliant  Schopenhauer,  evidently  devised  artificial  con- 
nections between  their  ethics  and  their  metaphysics. 

It  is  felt  that  Christian  ethics  are  something  that 
must  be  accepted  in  advance,  standing  quite  firmly,  not 
dependent  on  philosophy,  and  in  no  need  of  the  fic- 
titious props  put  to  support  them  ;  and  it  is  felt  that 
Philosophy  merely  devises  certain  propositions  in  order 
that  ethics  may  not  contradict  her,  but  may  rather  be 
bound  to  her  and  appear  to  flow  from  her.  All  such 
propositions,  however,  only  appear  to  justify  Christian 
ethics  while  they  are  considered  in  the  abstract.  As 
soon  as  they  are  applied  to  questions  of  practical  life, 
the  non-correspondence,  and,  more  than  that,  the 
evident  contradiction  between  the  philosophic  basis 
and  what  we  consider  morality,  appears  in  full  strength. 

The  unfortunate  Nietzsche,  who  has  latterly  become 
so    celebrated,    rendered    a    valuable    service  by  his 

k  2 


148  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

§» 

exposure  of  this  contradiction.  He  is  incontrovertible 
when  he  says  that  all  rules  of  morality,  from  the  point 
of  view  of  the  current  non-Christian  philosophy,  are 
mere  lies  and  hypocrisy,  and  that  it  is  much  more 
profitable,  pleasanter  and  more  reasonable,  for  a  man 
to  devise  his  own  Super-men  (Uebermensch)  and  be  one 
of  them,  than  to  be  one  of  the  mass  which  has  to  serve 
as  the  scaffold  for  these  Super-men.  No  philosophical 
constructions  founded  on  the  pagan-religious  view  of 
life  can  prove  to  anyone  that  it  is  more  profitable  or 
wiser  for  him  to  live,  not  for  a  welfare  he  desires,  com- 
prehends, and  sees  to  be  possible  for  himself  or  for  his 
family  or  his  society,  but  for  another's  welfare — un- 
desired,  not  understood,  and  unattainable  by  his  puny 
human  power.  Philosophy  founded  on  an  understand- 
ing of  life  limited  to  the  welfare  of  man,  will  never  be 
able  to  prove  to  a  rational  man,  who  knows  that  he  may 
die  at  any  moment,  that  it  is  good  for  him,  and  that  he 
ought,  to  forego  his  own  desired,  understood,  and  un- 
doubted welfare — not  even  for  any  certain  welfare  to 
others'  (for  he  can  never  know  what  will  result  from  his 
sacrifices),  but — merely  because  it  is  right  or  good  to  do 
so  :  that  it  is  a  categorical  imperative. 

To  prove  this  from  the  point  of  view  of  pagan  philo- 
sophy is  impossible.  To  prove  that  people  are  all 
equal — that  it  is  better  for  a  man  to  sacrifice  his  life  in 
the  service  of  others  than  to  trample  on  the  lives  of 
others,  making  them  serve  him — one  must  redefine 
one's  relation  to  the  universe  :  one  must  prove  that 
man's  position  is  such  that  he  has  no  option,  since  the 
meaning  of  his  life  lies  only  in  the  execution  of  the  will 
of  Him  that  sent  him  ;  and  the  will  of  Him  that  sent 
him  is,  that  he  should  give  his  life  to  the  service  of 
men.  And  such  a  change  in  man's  relation  to  the 
universe  comes  only  from  religion. 

Thus  it  is  with  the  attempts  to  deduce  Christian 
morality  from,  and  to  reconcile  it  with,  the  funda- 
mental positions  of  pagan  science.  No  sophistries  or 
subtleties  of  thought  can  destroy  this  simple  and  clear 
position,  that  the  law  of  evolution,  which  lies  at  the 


RELIGION  AND  MORALITY  149 

base  of  all  the  science  of  to-day,  is  founded  on  a  general, 
eternal,  and  unalterable  law — on  the  law  of  the  struggle 
for  existence,  and  the  survival  of  the  fittest ;  and  that, 
therefore,  each  man  to  attain  his  own  and  his  group's 
welfare  should  try  to  be  that  c  fittest,'  and  to  make  his 
group  such,  in  order  that  not  he  or  his  group  should 
perish,  but  some  other,  less  fit. 

However  much  some  naturalists,  frightened  by  the 
logical  consequences  of  this  law  and  by  their  applica- 
tion to  human  life,  may  try  to  perplex  the  matter  with 
words,  and  to  exorcise  this  law — their  efforts  only  make 
still  more  evident  the  irresistibility  of  that  law,  which 
rules  the  life  of  the  whole  organic  world,  and,  there- 
fore, that  of  man  regarded  as  an  animal. 

Since  I  began  writing  this  article,  a  Russian  transla- 
tion has  appeared  of  an  article  by  Mr.  Huxley,  com- 
posed of  a  speech  on  Evolution  and  Ethics*  delivered 
by  him  to  some  English  Society.  In  this  article  the 
learned  Professor  —  like  our  well-known  Professor 
Beketof  and  many  others  who  have  written  on  the 
same  subject,  and  with  as  little  success  as  his  predeces- 
sors— tries  to  prove  that  the  struggle  for  existence  does 
not  infringe  morality,  and  that  side  by  side  with  the 
acknowledgement  of  the  struggle  for  existence  as  a 
fundamental  law  of  life,  morality  may  not  merely  exist, 
but  even  progress.  Mr.  Huxley's  article  is  full  of  all 
kinds  of  jokes,  verses,  and  general  views  on  ancient 
religion  and  philosophy,  and  is  consequently  so  florid 
and  complicated  that  it  is  only  with  great  effort  that 
one  is  able  to  reach  its  fundamental  thought.  That 
thought,  however,  is  as  follows :  The  law  of  evolution 
runs  counter  to  the  moral  law  ;  this  was  known  to  the 
ancient  Greeks  and  Hindus.  The  philosophy  and 
religion  of  both  those  peoples  brought  them  to  the 
doctrine  of  self-renunciation.  That  doctrine,  the 
author  thinks,  is  not  correct ;  the  correct  one  is  this  : 
A  law  exists,  which  the  author  calls  the  cosmic  law,  in 

*  Huxley's  Romanes  Lecture,  delivered  in  1894,  and 
contained  in  Evolution  and  Eth.icst  issued  by  Macmillao 
and  Oo. 


150  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

accord  with  which  all  beings  struggle  against  one 
another,  and  only  the  fittest  survive.  Man  also  is  sub- 
ject to  this  law  ;  and  thanks  only  to  it  has  man  become 
what  he  now  is.  But  this  law  runs  counter  to  morality. 
How,  then,  can  it  be  reconciled  with  morality  ?  That 
can  be  accomplished  in  this  way  :  A  law  of  social  pro- 
gress exists,  which  seeks  to  check  the  cosmic  process, 
and  to  replace  it  by  another,  an  ethical,  process,  the 
object  of  which  is  the  survival,  not  of  the  fittest,  but  of 
the  best  in  an  ethical  sense.  Where  this  ethical  process 
sprang  from,  Mr.  Huxley  does  not  explain,  but  in  his 
20th  foot-note  he  says  that  the  basis  of  this  process  is, 
on  the  one  hand,  that  people,  like  animals,  prefer  to  be 
in  company,  and  therefore  suppress  in  themselves  quali- 
ties harmful  to  societies  ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  that 
the  members  of  a  society  forcibly  suppress  actions  con- 
trary to  social  welfare.  It  seems  to  Mr.  Huxley  that 
this  process,  obliging  men  to  curb  their  passions  for  the 
sake  of  preserving  the  group  of  which  they  are  members, 
and  for  fear  of  being  punished  if  they  disturbed  the 
order'  of  their  group,  supplies  that  ethical  law  the 
existence  of  which  he  wishes  to  demonstrate.  It  seems 
to  Mr.  Huxley,  in  the  naivete  of  his  soul,  that  in 
English  society,  as  it  exists  to-day — with  its  Irish 
problem,  the  poverty  of  its  lowest  classes,  the  insen- 
sate luxury  of  the  rich,  its  trade  in  opium  and  spirits, 
its  executions,  its  slaughter  or  extermination  of  tribes 
for  the  sake  of  trade  and  politics,  its  secret  vice  and  its 
hypocrisy — the  man  who  does  not  infringe  the  police 
regulations  is  a  moral  man,  guided  by  the  ethical  law. 
He  forgets  that  the  qualities  needful  to  maintain  the 
society  in  which  a  man  lives  may  be  useful  for  that 
society — as  the  qualities  of  the  members  of  a  band  of 
robbers  may  be  useful  to  that  band,  and  as  in  our  own 
society  we  find  a  use  for  the  qualities  of  executioners, 
gaolers,  judges,  soldiers,  and  hypocrite-priests,  etc. — 
but  that  these  qualities  have  nothing  in  common  with 
morality. 

Morality  is  something   continually   developing   and 
growing,  and,  therefore,    conformity  to   the   existing 


RELIGION  AND  MORALITY  151 

rules  of  a  certain  society,  and  their  preservation  by 
means  of  the  axe  or  the  scaffold  (to  which  Mr.  Huxley 
alludes  as  to  instruments  of  morality),  will  not  only  not 
be  the  maintenance,  but  will  be  the  infringement  of 
morality.  And,  on  the  contrary,  every  infringement 
of  the  existing  order — such  as  were  not  only  the  in- 
fringements committed  by  Jesus  and  his  disciples 
of  the  regulations  of  a  Roman  province,  but  the  in- 
fringements of  present-day  regulations  by  one  who 
should  refuse  to  take  part  in  legal  proceedings,  in 
military  service,  in  the  payment  of  taxes  levied  for 
warlike  preparations — will  not  only  not  be  an  infringe- 
ment of  morality,  but  will  be  an  inevitable  condition  of 
the  manifestation  of  morality. 

Every  cannibal  who  perceives  that  he  should  not  eat 
his  fellow-men,  and  who  acts  accordingly,  infringes  the 
order  of  his  society.  And,  therefore,  though  action 
infringing  the  order  of  any  society  may  be  immoral, 
every  truly  moral  action  which  pushes  forward  the 
limits  of  morality  will  always  be  sure  to  be  an  infringe- 
ment of  the  order  of  society.  If,  therefore,  a  law  has 
appeared  in  society  in  accord  with  which  people  sacri- 
fice their  personal  advantages  for  the  preservation  of 
the  integrity  of  their  group — that  law  is  not  the  ethical 
law,  but,  on  the  contrary,  will  generally  be  a  law  con- 
trary to  all  ethics — that  same  law  of  the  struggle  for 
existence,  only  in  a  hidden,  latent  form.  It  is  the 
same  struggle  for  existence,  but  carried  over  from  the 
individual  to  a  group  of  individuals.  It  is  not  the 
cessation  of  the  fight,  but  only  a  backward  swinging  of 
the  arm,  to  strike  a  harder  blow. 

If  the  law  of  the  struggle  for  existence  and  the  sur- 
vival of  the  fittest  is  the  eternal  law  of  all  life  (and  it 
cannot  but  be  admitted  to  be  so  when  we  regard  man 
as  an  animal) — then  no  tangled  discussions  about  social 
progress  and  an  ethical  law  supposed  to  flow  from  it,  or 
to  spring  up  from  no  one  knows  where,  just  when  we 
happen  to  need  it  (like  a  deus  ex  machina),  can  disturb 
that  law. 

If  social  progress,  as  Mr.  Huxley  assures  us,  collects 


152  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

people  into  groups,  then  the  struggle  and  the  survival 
will  continue  among  those  families,  clans,  and  nations, 
and  the  struggle  will  not  only  not  be  more  moral,  but 
it  will  be  even  more  cruel  and  more  immoral  than  that 
between  individuals,  as  we  see  in  actual  life.  Even  if 
we  admit  the  impossible,  and  suppose  that  in  another 
thousand  years  all  humanity  will,  by  social  progress 
alone,  be  united  into  one  whole,  and  will  form  a  single 
nation  and  a  single  State — even  then  (not  to  mention 
that  the  struggle  abolished  between  nations  and  States 
will  continue  between  man  and  the  animal  world,  and 
will  always  remain  a  struggle — that  is,  will  remain  an 
activity  quite  excluding  the  possibility  of  the  Christian 
morality  we  confess) — even  then  the  struggle  between 
individuals  forming  this  union,  and  between  the  groups 
of  families,  clans  and  nationalities,  will  not  be  dimin- 
ished, but  will  continue  in  a  new  form,  as  we  see  in  all 
aggregations  of  individuals,  families,  races  and  States. 
The  members  of  a  family  quarrel  and  fight  with  one 
another  as  well  as  with  outsiders,  and  often  to  a  greater 
degree  and  with  more  venom.  It  is  just  the  same  thing 
in  the  State ;  among  people  living  in  one  State,  a 
struggle  continues  just  as  with  people  outside  the 
State,  only  it  is  carried  on  under  other  forms.  In  the 
one  case  the  slaughter  is  done  with  arrows  and  knives, 
in  the  other  it  is  done  by  hunger.  And  if  both  in  the 
family  and  in  the  State  the  weak  are  saved,  that  is  not 
done  by  the  social  union,  but  occurs  because  among  the 
people  united  in  families  and  in  States,  love  and  self- 
sacrifice  exist.  If,  outside  the  family,  of  two  children 
only  the  fittest  survives,  while  in  a  good  mother's  family 
both  remain  alive,  this  does  not  result  from  union  into 
families,  but  from  the  fact  that  the  mother  possesses 
love  and  self-sacrifice.  And  neither  self-sacrifice  nor 
love  can  result  from  a  social  process. 

To  assert  that  a  social  process  produces  morality 
is  like  asserting  that  the  construction  of  stoves  pro- 
duces heat. 

Heat  comes  from  the  sun,  and  stoves  produce  heat 
only  when  fuel  (the  result  of  the  sun's  work)  is  put  into 


RELIGION  AND  MORALITY  153 

them.  Just  so  morality  comes  from  religion.  Special 
forms  of  social  life  produce  morality  only  when  the 
results  of  religious  influence — which  is  morality — are 
put  into  them. 

Stoves  may  be  heated  and  give  warmth,  or  may  not 
be  heated  and  may  remain  cold ;  just  as  social  forms 
may  contain  morality,  and  may  then  have  a  moral  influ- 
ence on  society,  or  may  not  contain  morality,  and  will 
then  remain  without  influence  on  society. 

Christian  morality  cannot  be  based  on  a  pagan  or 
social  conception  of  life,  and  cannot  be  deduced  either 
from  philosophy  or  from  non-Christian  science  ;  and 
not  only  can  it  not  be  deduced  from  them,  but  it  can- 
not even  be  reconciled  with  them. 

That  is  how  the  matter  has  always  been  understood 
by  every  serious  and  strictly  consistent  philosophy  and 
science,  which  said,  quite  reasonably :  ( If  our  proposi- 
tions do  not  tally  with  morality,  so  much  the  worse  for 
morality, '  and  continued  their  investigations. 

Ethical  treatises  not  founded  on  religion,  and  even 
secular  catechisms,  are  written  and  taught,  and  people 
may  suppose  that  humanity  is  guided  by  them  ;  but 
that  only  seems  to  be  the  case,  because  people  are  really 
guided  not  by  those  treatises  and  catechisms,  but  by  the 
religions  which  they  have  always  possessed  and  still 
possess ;  whereas  these  treatises  and  catechisms  only 
counterfeit  what  flows  naturally  from  religion. 

The  dictates  of  secular  morality  not  based  on  a 
religious  teaching  are  just  like  the  action  of  a  man 
who,  though  ignorant  of  music,  should  take  the  con- 
ductor's seat  and  begin  to  wave  his  arms  before  the 
experienced  musicians  who  were  performing.  The 
music  would  continue  for  awhile  by  its  own  momentum, 
and  because  of  what  the  musicians  had  learned  from 
former  conductors  ;  but  evidently  the  waving  of  a  stick 
by  a  man  ignorant  of  music  would  not  merely  be  use- 
less, but  it  would  in  course  of  time  certainly  confuse 
the  musicians  and  disorganize  the  orchestra.  A  simi- 
lar confusion  begins  to  take  place  in  people's  minds  at 
the  present  time,  in  consequence  of  attempts  made  by 


154  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

leading  men  to  teach  people  a  morality  not  founded  on 
that  highest  religion  which  begins  to  be  assimilated, 
and  has  already  been  partly  assimilated,  by  Christian 
humanity. 

It  is  indeed  desirable  to  have  moral  teaching  unmixed 
with  superstition,  but  the  fact  is  that  moral  teaching  is 
a  result  of  a  certain  relation  man  holds  towards  the 
universe  or  towards  God.  If  that  relation  is  expressed 
in  forms  which  seem  to  us  superstitious,  we  should, 
to  right  the  matter,  try  to  express  that  relation  more 
reasonably,  clearly,  and  exactly,  or  even  to  destroy  the 
former  relation  (now  become  inadequate)  of  man  to  the 
universe,  and  to  substitute  for  it  one  that  is  higher 
clearer,  and  more  reasonable ;  but  we  should  in  no 
case  devise  a  so-called  secular,  non-religious  morality 
founded  on  sophistry,  or  simply  founded  on  nothing 
at  all. 

The  attempts  to  found  a  morality  apart  from  religion, 
are  like  what  children  do  when,  wishing  to  transplant 
a  flower  that  pleases  them — they  pluck  it  from  the  roots 
that  dp  not  please,  and  seem  to  them  superfluous,  and 
stick  it  rootless  into  the  ground.  Without  religious 
roots  there  can  be  no  real,  sincere  morality,  just  as 
without  roots  there  can  be  no  real  flower. 

So  in  answer  to  your  two  questions,  I  say  :  { Religion 
is  a  certain  relation  established  by  man  between  his 
separate  personality  and  the  infinite  universe  or  its 
Source.  And  morality  is  the  ever-present  guide  to  life 
which  results  from  that  relation.* 

[December  28,  o.s.,  1898.] 


VIII 
REASON  AND  RELIGION 

A   LETTER   TO    AN    INQUIRER 

You  ask  me  : 

1.  Should  men  of  no  special  intellectual  gifts  seek  to 
express  in  words  truths  they  have  reached  relating  to 
the  inner  life  ? 

2.  Is  it  worth  while  to  try  to  attain  full  and  clear 
understanding  of  one's  inner  life  ? 

3.  How  in  moments  of  struggle  or  doubt  are  we  to 
know  whether  it  is  conscience  that  speaks  to  us,  or 
whether  it  is  intellect  bribed  by  our  infirmities  ?  (This 
third  question,  for  brevity's  sake,  I  have  restated  in  my 
own  words  without,  I  hope,  altering  your  meaning.) 

These  three  questions,  it  seems  to  me,  are  all  summed 
up  in  one — the  second ;  for  if  we  should  not  try  to 
attain  full  and  clear  understanding  of  our  inner  life, 
then  also  we  should  not,  and  cannot,  express  in  words 
the  truths  we  have  reached  ;  and  in  moments  of  doubt 
we  shall  have  nothing  to  guide  us  in  distinguishing 
between  conscience  and  false  reasoning.  But  if  it  is 
right  to  seek  the  greatest  clearness  one's  mental  powers 
can  reach  (whether  those  powers  be  great  or  small), 
then  we  should  also  express  in  words  the  truths  we 
have  reached,  and  by  those  truths,  elucidated  to  the 
utmost  and  expressed  in  words,  we  must  be  guided  in 
moments  of  struggle  or  doubt.  And  therefore  I  answer 
your  root  question  in  the  affirmative  ;  namely,  that 
every  man,  in  order  to  accomplish  the  purpose  for 
which  he  was  sent  here,  and  to  attain  true  well-being 
[  155  ] 


156  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

(the  two  always  accord),  should  exert  the  whole  strength 
of  his  mind  to  elucidate  for  himself  the  religious  founda- 
tions on  which  he  rests  ;  that  is  to  say,  he  should  clear 
up  the  purpose  of  his  life. 

Among  uneducated  navvies,  whose  work  is  paid  for 
by  the  cubic  fathom,  I  have  often  met  with  a  prevalent 
conviction  that  mathematical  calculations  are  decep- 
tive and  should  not  be  trusted.  Whether  this  is 
because  they  do  not  know  mathematics,  or  because 
those  who  calculate  the  earth  they  have  dug  up  often 
intentionally  or  unintentionally  cheat  them,  the  fact 
remains  that  disbelief  in  the  sufficiency  or  applicability 
of  mathematics  to  estimate  quantities,  has  firmly  estab- 
lished itself  among  these  uneducated  labourers,  and  for 
most  of  them  has  become  an  unquestioned  verity,  which 
they  do  not  even  consider  it  necessary  to  prove.  A 
similar  opinion  has  established  itself  among  people 
whom  I  may  safely  call  irreligious — an  opinion  to  the 
effect  that  reason  cannot  solve  religious  questions  ;  that 
the  application  of  reason  to  these  questions  is  the  chief 
source  of  errors,  and  that  to  solve  religious  questions 
by  reason  is  an  act  of  wicked  pride. 

I  mention  this  because  the  doubt  expressed  in  your 
questions  as  to  whether  one  should  try  to  attain  full 
and  clear  understanding,  can  only  arise  from  the  sup- 
position that  reason  cannot  be  applied  to  the  solution 
of  religious  questions.  Yet  that  supposition  is  as 
strange  and  as  obviously  false  as  the  supposition  that 
calculation  cannot  solve  mathematical  questions. 

Man  has  received  direct  from  God  only  one  instrument 
wherewith  to  know  himself  and  to  know  his  relation  to 
the  universe — he  has  no  other — and  that  instrument  is 
reason  :  but  suddenly  he  is  told  that  his  reason  may  be 
used  to  elucidate  his  home,  family,  business,  political, 
scientific  or  artistic  problems,  but  may  not  be  used  to 
clear  up  the  very  thing  for  which  it  was  chiefly  granted 
him.  It  would  seem  that  to  clear  up  the  most  important 
truths,  those  on  which  his  whole  life  depends,  man 
must  on  no  account  use  his  reason,  but  must  recognUo 
such  truths  apart  from  his  reason,  though  apart  from 


REASON  AND  RELIGION  157 

his  reason  man  can  know  nothing.  People  say  :  '  Recog- 
nise by  inspiration,  by  faith ' :  but  the  fact  is,  that  man 
cannot  even  believe  apart  from  his  reason.  If  a  man 
believes  one  thing  and  not  another,  he  does  this  only 
because  his  reason  tells  him  he  should  not  believe  this, 
but  should  believe  that.  To  say  a  man  should  not  be 
guided  by  reason,  is  the  same  as  to  say  to  a  man  carry- 
ing a  lamp  in  a  dark  catacomb,  that,  to  find  the  way 
out,  he  must  extinguish  his  lamp  and  be  guided,  not  by 
light,  but  by  something  else. 

But  perhaps  it  will  be  said  (as  you  say  in  your  letter) 
that  not  all  men  are  gifted  with  great  intellect,  and 
especially  not  with  capacity  to  express  their  thoughts  ; 
and  by  an  unskilful  expression  of  their  thoughts  about 
religion  they  may,  therefore,  occasion  error.  To  that 
I  will  reply  in  the  words  of  the  Gospel,  that  what  is 
hidden  from  the  wise  is  revealed  to  babes.  And  this 
saying  is  not  an  exaggeration  or  a  paradox  (as  we  are 
accustomed  to  consider  sayings  in  the  Gospels  that  do 
not  please  us),  but  is  a  statement  of  the  simplest  and 
most  undoubted  truth,  namely,  that  to  every  being  in 
the  world  a  law  is  given  which  that  being  should  follow, 
and  that  to  enable  him  to  perceive  this  law,  every  being 
has  received  suitable  organs.  And,  therefore,  every  man 
is  gifted  with  reason,  and  by  that  reason  the  law  he 
should  follow  is  revealed  to  each  man.  That  law  is 
hidden  only  from  those  who  do  not  wish  to  follow  it, 
and  who,  in  order  not  to  obey  the  law,  reject  reason, 
and,  instead  of  using  the  reason  given  to  them  where- 
with to  discern  truth,  accept  on  faith  the  guidance  of 
others  who  have  also  rejected  reason. 

The  law  man  should  follow  is  so  simple  that  it  is 
accessible  to  every  child  :  especially  as  man  need  not 
rediscover  this  law  of  his  life.  Those  who  lived  before 
us  discovered  and  expressed  it,  and  a  man  need  only 
verify  the  propositions  he  finds  expressed  in  tradition, 
by  his  own  reason — accepting  or  rejecting  them.  But 
he  must  not  do  as  people  advise  who  prefer  not  to  obey 
the  law  :  he  must  not  check  his  reason  by  tradition, 
but,   contrariwise,   must   check    tradition   by  reason. 


158  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

Traditions  may  come  from  man  and  be  false,  but  reason 
certainly  comes  from  God  and  cannot  be  false.  And, 
therefore,  no  specially  great  capacities  are  needed  to 
know  and  express  the  truth,  but  we  need  only  believe 
that  reason  not  only  is  the  highest,  the  divine  quality 
in  man,  but  that  it  is  the  only  instrument  he  possesses 
for  the  attainment  of  truth. 

Special  talents  and  intellectual  gifts  are  needed,  not 
for  the  knowledge  and  statement  of  truth,  but  for  the 
invention  and  statement  of  falsehood.  Once  they 
abandon  the  indications  of  reason,  and,  instead  of 
believing  them,  credulously  accept  what  is  offered  to 
them  as  truth,  people  pile  up  and  credulously  accept 
(usually  in  the  guise  of  laws,  revelations,  and  dogmas) 
such  complex,  unnatural  and  contradictory  propositions, 
that  to  express  them  and  connect  them  with  any  truth 
really  needs  great  subtlety  of  mind  and  exceptional 
gifts.  One  need  only  imagine  to  one's  self  a  man  of  our 
world,  educated  in  the  religious  beliefs  of  any  one  of 
the  Christian  Churches — Catholic,  Russo-Greek  Ortho- 
dox, or  Protestant — who  should  wish  to  elucidate  the 
religious  principles  with  which  he  has  been  inoculated 
in  childhood,  and  to  connect  them  with  real  life — what 
a  complex  intellectual  labour  he  would  have  to  perform 
in  order  to  adjust  all  the  contradictions  contained  in 
the  faith  with  which  his  education  had  inoculated  him  : 
a  God,  who  is  the  Creator  and  is  good — creates  evil, 
condemns  people,  and  demands  a  ransom,  etc.  ;  and 
we  ourselves  profess  a  law  of  love  and  forgiveness,  yet 
we  execute,  make  war,  take  their  produce  from  the 
poor,  etc. 

For  the  disentanglement  of  these  insoluble  contra- 
dictions, or,  rather,  in  order  to  hide  them  from  one's 
self,  great  ability  and  special  mental  endowments  aiv 
necessary  ;  but  to  know  the  law  of  one's  life,  or,  as 
you  express  it,  to  attain  full  and  clear  understanding 
of  one  s  belief,  no  special  mental  gifts  are  required 
— we  only  need  be  careful  not  to  accept  anything  con- 
trary to  reason,  not  to  deny  our  reason,  religiously  to 
guard  our  reason  and  believe  in  it  alone.     If  the  mean- 


REASON  AND  RELIGION  159 

ing  of  his  life  seems  obscure  to  a  man,  this  does  not 
prove  that  his  reason  is  incompetent  to  explain  that 
meaning  ;  it  only  indicates  that  he  has  credulously- 
accepted  too  much  that  is  irrational,  and  that  what 
has  not  been  verified  by  reason  must  be  set  aside. 

And,  therefore,  my  answer  to  your  root  question,  as 
to  whether  we  must  strive  to  attain  a  clear  understand- 
ing of  our  inner  life,  is,  that  that  is  the  most  necessary 
and  important  thing  we  can  do  in  life.  It  is  necessary 
and  important  because  the  only  reasonable  meaning 
of  our  life  consists  in  fulfilment  of  the  will  of  God, 
who  has  sent  us  here.  But  the  will  of  God  is  known, 
not  by  some  extraordinary  miracle,  the  writing  of  the 
law  by  the  finger  of  the  Deity  on  stone  tablets,  the 
compilation  by  the  aid  of  the  Holy  Ghost  of  an  infal- 
lible book,  or  by  the  infallibility  of  any  holy  man  or 
collection  of  men,  but  only  by  the  use  of  reason  by 
all  men,  transmitting  both  by  deed  and  by  word,  one 
to  another,  the  consciousness  of  truth  that  is  ever  more 
and  more  elucidating  itself  to  them.  That  knowledge 
never  has  been,  nor  ever  will  be,  complete,  but  it  ever 
increases  as  humanity  advances  :  the  longer  we  live  the 
more  clearly  we  know  God^s  will,  and,  consequently, 
the  more  we  know  what  we  should  do  to  fulfil  it.  And 
so  I  think  the  clearing  up  by  each  man  (however  small 
he  may  seem  to  himself  or  to  others — the  least  are 
the  greatest)  of  all  religious  truth  accessible  to  him, 
and  its  expression  in  words  (for  expression  in  words  is 
one  sure  sign  of  complete  clearness  in  thought),  is  one 
of  the  chief  and  most  holy  duties  of  man. 

I  shall  be  very  glad  if  my  reply,  in  any  degree, 
satisfies  you. 

[1895.] 


IX 

SHAME ! 

There  was  a  time,  between  1820  and  1830,  when  the 
officers  of  the  Semenof  Regiment,  the  flower  of  the 
young  generation  of  that  time,  men  who  were  for  the 
most  part  Freemasons,  and  subsequently  Decembrists,* 
decided  not  to  use  corporal  punishment  in  their  regi- 
ment, and,  notwithstanding  the  stringent  discipline 
then  required,  without  using  corporal  punishment, 
theirs  continued  to  be  a  model  regiment. 

The  officer  in  charge  of  one  of  the  companies  of 
this  same  Semenof  Regiment,  meeting  Sergius  Ivano- 
vitch  Mouravyof — one  of  the  best  men  of  his,  or  indeed 
of  any,  time — spoke  of  a  certain  soldier,  a  thief  and  a 
drunkard,  saying  that  such  a  man  could  only  be  tamed 
with  rods.  Sergius  Mouravyof  did  not  agree  with 
him,  and  proposed  transferring  the  man  into  his  own 
company. 

The  transfer  was  made,  and  almost  the  next  day  the 
soldier  stole  a  comrade's  boots,  sold  them  for  drink, 
and  made  a  disturbance.  Sergius  Ivanovitch  mustered 
the  company,  called  the  soldier  out,  and  said  to  him  : 
6  You  know  that  in  my  regiment  we  neither  strike  men 
nor  flog  them,  and  I  am  not  going  to  punish  you.  I 
shall  pay,  with  my  own  money,  for  the  boots  you  stole, 
but  I  ask  you,  not  for  my  sake  but  for  your  own,  to 
think  over  your  way  of  life  and  to  amend  it.'     And 

*  Members  of  the  party  which  attempted,  but  failed,  to 
secure  by  forco  a  liberal  constitution  for  Russia,  in  1825, 
when  Nicholas  I.  ascended  the  throne. 
[  160  ] 


SHAME !  161 

after  giving  the  man  some  friendly  counsel,  Sergius 
Ivanovitch  let  him  go. 

The  man  again  got  drunk  and  fought,  and  again  he 
was  not  punished  but  only  exhorted :  '  You  are  doing 
yourself  great  harm.  If  you  will  amend,  you  will  your- 
self be  the  better  for  it.  So  I  ask  you  not  to  do  these 
things  any  more/ 

The  'man  was  so  struck  by  this  new  kind  of  treat- 
ment, that  he  completely  altered,  and  became  a  model 
soldier. 

This  incident  was  told  me  by  Sergius  Ivanovitch's 
brother,  Matthew  Ivanovitch,  who,  like  his  brother 
and  all  the  best  men  of  his  day,  considered  corporal 
punishment  a  shameful  relic  of  "barbarism,  disgraceful 
to  those  who  inflict  it  rather  than  to  those  who  endure 
it.  When  telling  this  story  he  could  never  refrain 
from  tears  of  emotion  and  pleasure.  And  indeed  for 
those  who  heard  him  tell  it,  it  was  hard  not  to  follow 
his  example. 

That  is  how,  seventy-five  years  ago,  educated  Russians 
regarded  corporal  punishment.  And  in  our  day,  seventy- 
five  years  later,  the  grandsons  of  these  men  take  their 
places  as  magistrates  at  sessions,  and  calmly  discuss 
whether  such  and  such  a  full-grown  man  (often  the 
jfather  of  a  family,  or  sometimes  even  a  grandfather) 
should,  or  should  not,  be  flogged,  and  how  many  strokes 
of  the  rod  he  ought  to  receive. 

The  most  advanced  of  these  grandsons,  meeting  in 
committees  and  Local  Government  Councils,  draw  up 
declarations,  addresses,  and  petitions,  to  the  effect  that, 
on  certain  hygienic  or  pedagogic  grounds,*  it  would  be 
better  not  to  flog  all  the  mouzhiks  (people  of  the  peasant 

*  By  petitioning,  openly,  for  the  repeal  of  laws  such  as 
that  empowering  the  local  magistrates  to  have  peasants 
flogged,  the  petitioners  would  risk  being  looked  at  askance 
by  those  in  power.  But  members  of  local  Health  Com- 
mittees, or  Educational  Committees  sometimes  find  oppor- 
tunities to  utter  veiled  protests  with  a  minimum  amount 
of  risk. 


162  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

class),  but  only  those  who  have  not  passed  all  the  classes 
of  the  National  Schools. 

Evidently  a  great  change  has  taken  place  in  what 
we  call  the  educated  upper  classes.  The  men  of  the 
'twenties,  who  considered  the  infliction  of  corporal 
punishment  disgraceful  to  themselves,  were  able  to  get 
rid  of  it  even  in  the  military  service,  where  it  was 
deemed  indispensable  ;  but  the  men  of  our  day  calmly 
apply  it,  not  to  soldiers  only,  but  to  any  man  of  one 
special  class  of  the  Russian  people,  and  cautiously, 
diplomatically,  in  their  committees  and  assemblies, 
draw  up  addresses  and  petitions  to  the  Government, 
with  all  sorts  of  reservations  and  circumlocutions,  say- 
ing that  there  are  hygienic  objections  to  punishment 
by  flogging,  and  therefore  its  use  should  be  limited ; 
or  that  it  would  be  desirable  only  to  flog  those  peasants 
who  have  not  gone  through  a  certain  school  course,  or 
not  to  flog  peasants  referred  to  in  the  Manifesto  issued 
on  the  occasion  of  the  Tsar's  marriage. 

Evidently  a  terrible  change  has  taken  place  among 
the  so-called  upper  classes  of  Russian  society.  And 
what  is  most  astonishing  is  that  it  has  come  about  just 
while  (during  these  same  seventy-five  years  ;  and  especi- 
ally during  the  last  thirty-five,  since  the  emancipation 
of  the  serfs),  in  the  very  class  which  it  is  considered 
necessary  to  expose  to  this  revolting,  coarse,  and  stupid 
torture  by  flogging,  an  equally  important  change  has 
taken  place  in  the  contrary  direction. 

While  the  upper,  governing  classes  have  sunk  to  a 

fdane  so  coarse  and  morally  degraded  that  they  have 
egalized  flogging  and  can  calmly  discuss  it,  the  mental 
and  moral  plane  of  the  peasant  class  has  so  risen  that 
corporal  punishment  has  become  for  them  not  only  a 
physical,  but  also  a  moral,  torture. 

I  have  heard  and  read  of  cases  of  suicide  committed 
by  peasants  sentenced  to  be  flogged,  and  I  cannot  doubt 
that  such  cases  occur,  for  I  have  myself  seen  a  most 
ordinary  young  peasant  turn  white  as  a  sheet  and  lose 
control  of  his  voice  at  the  mere  mention,  in  the  District 
Court,  of  the  possibility  of  it  being  inflicted  on  him. 


SHAME !  163 

I  have  seen  how  another  peasant  of  forty,  who  had 
been  condemned  to  corporal  punishment,  wept  when, 
in  reply  to  my  inquiry  whether  the  sentence  had  been 
executed,  he  had  to  reply  that  it  had  been. 

I  know,  too,  the  case  of  a  respected,  elderly  peasant 
of  my  acquaintance,  who  was  sentenced  to  be  flogged 
because  he  had  quarrelled  with  the  Overseer,  not 
noticing  that  the  latter  was  wearing  his  badge  of  office. 
The  man  was  brought  to  the  District  Court,  and  from 
there  to  the  shed  in  which  the  punishment  is  usually 
inflicted.  The  watchman  came  with  the  rods,  and  the 
peasant  was  told  to  strip. 

(  Parme'n  Ermilitch,  you  know  I  have  a  son  who  is 
married/  said  the  peasant,  addressing  the  Elder,  and 
trembling  all  over.  'Can't  this  be  avoided?  You 
know  it's  a  sin/ 

'It's  the  authorities,  Petrovitch.  I  should  be  glad 
enough  myself,  but  there's  no  help  for  it,'  replied  the 
Elder  abashed. 

Petrovitch  undressed  and  lay  down. 

'  Christ  suffered,  and  told  us  to,'  said  he. 

The  clerk,  an  eye-witness,  told  me  the  story,  and 
said  that  every  man's  hand  trembled  and  none  of  those 
present  could  look  one  another  in  the  face — feeling 
that  they  were  doing  something  dreadful.  And  these 
are  the  people  whom  it  is  considered  necessary,  and 
probably  for  some  reason  advantageous,  to  beat  with 
rods,  like  animals,  though  it  is  forbidden  to  torture 
even  animals. 

For  the  benefit  of  our  Christian  and  enlightened 
country,  it  is  necessary  to  subject  to  this  most  stupid, 
most  indecent,  and  most  degrading  punishment,  not  all 
members  of  this  Christian  and  enlightened  country, 
but  only  that  class  which  is  the  most  industrious,  use- 
ful, moral,  and  numerous. 

To  prevent  violations  of  the  law,  the  highest  authori- 
ties of  an  enormous  Christian  empire,  nineteen  centuries 
after  Christ,  can  devise  nothing  wiser  and  more  moral 
than  to  take  the  transgressors — grown-up  and  some- 

l  2 


164  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

times  elderly  people — undress  them,  lay  them  on  the 
floor,  and  whip  their  bottoms  with  birches.* 

And  people  who  consider  themselves  most  advanced, 
and  who  are  grandsons  of  those  who  seventy-five  years 
ago  got  rid  of  corporal  punishment,  now,  in  our  day, 
most  respectfully  and  quite  seriously,  petition  his 
Excellency  the  Minister,  or  whoever  it  may  be,  not  to 
allow  so  much  flogging  of  grown-up  Russians,  because 
the  doctors  are  of  opinion  that  it  is  unhealthy ;  or  beg 
that  those  who  have  a  school  diploma  should  not  be 
whipped  ;  or  that  those  who  were  to  be  flogged  at  the 
time  of  the  Emperor's  marriage  should  be  let  off".  And 
the  wise  Government  meets  such  frivolous  petitions 
with  profound  silence,  or  even  prohibits  them. 

Can  one  seriously  petition  on  this  matter  ?  Is  there 
really  any  question  r  Surely  there  are  some  deeds 
which,  whether  perpetrated  by  private  individuals  or 
by  Governments,  one  cannot  calmly  discuss,  and  con- 
demn only  under  certain  circumstances.  And  the 
flogging  of  adult  members  of  one  particular  class  of 
Russiafi  people,  in  our  time  and  among  our  mild  and 
Christianly-enlightened  folk,  is  such  a  deed.  To  hinder 
such  crimes  against  all  law,  human  and  divine,  one 
cannot  diplomatically  approach  the  Government  under 
cover  of  hygienic  or  educational  or  loyalistic  considera- 
tions. Of  such  deeds  we  must  either  not  speak  at  all, 
or  we  must  speak  straight  to  the  point  and  always  with 
detestation  and  abhorrence.  To  ask  that  only  those 
peasants  who  are  literate  should  be  exempt  from  being 
beaten  on  their  bare  buttocks,  is  as  though  in  a  land 
where  the  law  decreed  that  unfaithful  wives  should  be 
punished  by  being  stripped  and  exposed  in  the  streets, 
people  were  to  petition  that  this  punishment  should 
only  be  inflicted  on  such  as  could  not  knit  stockings, 
or  do  something  of  that  kind. 

*  And  why  choose  just  this  stupid  and  brutal  method  of 
causing  pain  and  not  some  other  ?  Why  not  stick  needles 
into  people's  shoulders  or  other  parts?— or  squeeze  their 
hands  and  feet  in  vices — or  do  something  of  that  kind  ? — 
L.T. 


,  SHAME !  165 

About  such  deeds  one  cannot  e  most  humbly  pray/ 
nor  '  lay  our  petition  at  the  foot  of  the  throne/  etc. — 
such  deeds  must  only,  and  can  only,  be  denounced. 
And  such  deeds  should  be  denounced,  because  when  an 
appearance  of  legality  is  given  to  them  they  disgrace 
us  all  who  live  in  the  country  in  which  they  are  com- 
mitted. For  if  it  is  legal  to  flog  a  peasant,  this  has 
been  enacted  for  my  benefit  also,  to  secure  my  tran- 
quillity and  well-being.     And  that  is  intolerable. 

I  will  not  and  I  cannot  acknowledge  a  law  which 
infringes  all  law  human  and  divine  ;  and  I  cannot 
imagine  myself  confederate  with  those  who  enact  and 
confirm  such  legalized  crimes. 

If  such  abominations  must  be  discussed,  there  is  but 
one  thing  to  say — viz.,  that  no  such  law  can  exist ;  that 
no  ukaze,  nor  insignia,  nor  seals,  nor  Imperial  com- 
mands, can  make  a  law  out  of  a  crime  ;  but  that,  on  the 
contrary,  the  dressing-up  in  legal  form  of  such  crimes 
(as  that  the  grown  men  of  one — only  one — class,  may, 
at  the  will  of  another,  a  worse,  class — the  nobles  and 
the  officials — be  subjected  to  an  indecent,  savage,  and 
revolting  punishment),  shows,  better  than  anything 
else,  that  where  such  sham  legalization  of  crime  is  pos- 
sible, no  laws  at  all  exist,  but  merely  the  savage  licence 
of  brute  force. 

If  one  has  to  speak  of  corporal  punishment  inflicted 
on  the  peasant  class  alone,  the  needful  thing  is — not  to 
defend  the  rights  of  the  Local  Government,  or  appeal 
from  a  Governor  (who  has  vetoed  a  petition  to  exempt 
literate  peasants  from  flogging)  to  a  Minister,  and  from 
the  Minister  to  the  Senate,  and  from  the  Senate  to  the 
Emperor  (as  was  proposed  by  the  Tambdf  Local 
Assembly),  but  unceasingly  to  proclaim  and  cry  aloud 
that  such  applications  of  a  brutal  punishment  (already 
abandoned  for  children)  to  one — and  that  the  best — 
class  of  Russians,  is  disgraceful  to  all  who,  directly  or 
indirectly,  participate  in  it. 

Petrovitch,  who  lay  down  to  be  beaten  after  crossing 
himself  and  saying :  e  Christ  suffered  and  told  us  to/ 
forgave  his  tormentors,  and  remained  after  the  flogging 


166  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

the  man  he  was  hefore.  The  only  result  of  the  torture 
inflicted  upon  him  was  to  make  him  scorn  the  authority 
which  decrees  such  punishments.  But  to  many  young 
people,,  not  only  the  punishment  itself  but  often  even 
the  knowledge  that  it  is  possible,  acts  debasingly  on 
their  moral  feelings,  brutalizing  some  and  making  others 
desperate.  Yet  even  that  is  not  the  chief  evil.  The 
greatest  evil  is  in  the  mental  condition  of  those  who 
arrange,  sanction,  and  decree  these  abominations,  of 
those  who  employ  them  as  threats,  and  of  all  who  live 
in  the  conviction  that  such  violations  of  justice  and 
humanity  are  needful  conditions  of  a  good  and  orderly 
life.  What  terrible  moral  perversion  must  exist  in  the 
minds  and  hearts  of  those— often  young  men — who, 
with  an  air  of  profound  practical  wisdom,  say  (as  I  have 
myself  heard  said)  that  it  won't  do  not  to  flog  peasants, 
and  that  it  is  better  for  the  peasants  themselves  to  be 
flogged. 

These  are  the  people  most  to  be  pitied  for  the  debase- 
ment into  which  they  have  sunk,  and  in  which  they  are 
stagnating. 

Therefore,  the  emancipation  of  the  Russian  people 
from  the  degrading  influence  of  a  legalized  crime  is, 
from  every  aspect,  a  matter  of  enormous  importance. 
And  this  emancipation  will  be  accomplished,  not  when 
exemption  from  corporal  punishment  is  obtained  by 
those  who  have  a  school  diploma,  or  by  any  other  set 
of  peasants,  nor  even  when  all  the  peasants  but  one  are 
exempted,  but  it  will  only  be  accomplished  when  the 
governing  classes  confess  their  sin  and  humbly 
repent. 

[December  14,  o.s.,  1S95.] 


LETTER  TO  PETER  VERIGIN,  THE 
doukhobOr  LEADER— I 

Dear  Brother, 

I.  M.  Tregoubof  has  sent  on  to  me  your  letter  to 
him,  and  I  was  much  pleased  to  read  it — pleased  to  get 
to  know  about  you  and,  as  it  were,  to  hear  your  voice, 
and  to  know  what  you  are  thinking  about,  and  how  you 
think,  and  what  is  vital  to  you.  J  see  by  your  letter 
that  you  live  in  a  spiritual  world  and  are  occupied 
with  spiritual  questions.  For  a  man's  welfare,  that  is 
the  chief  thing  :  for  only  in  spirit  is  man  free,  and 
only  by  the  spirit  is  God's  work  done,  and  only  in 
spirit  does  man  feel  himself  at  one  with  God,  for  l  God 
is  a  spirit.' 

The  thoughts  expressed  in  your  letter  about  the 
advantage  of  living  intercourse  over  intercourse  by 
means  of  dead  books,  pleased  me  much,  and  I  share 
them.  I  write  books,  and  therefore  know  all  the  evil 
they  produce.  I  know  how  people  who  do  not  wish  to 
receive  the  truth,  can  avoid  reading  books  or  under- 
standing what'  goes  against  the  grain  and  exposes  them, 
and  I  know  how  they  can  misinterpret  and  pervert — as 
they  have  done  with  the  Gospels.  All  this  1  know,  but 
yet  I  consider  books  to  be,  in  our  time,  inevitable.  I 
say  'in  our  time'  in  contradistinction  to  the  Gospel 
times,  when  there  were  no  printing-presses  and  books 
were  not  used,  and  the  means  of  communication  were 
vocal.  Then  it  was  possible  to  do  without  books, 
for  the  enemies  of  truth  had  none.  But  now  one 
cannot  leave  this  powerful  engine  entirely  for  the 
[  167  ] 


168  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

enemies  of  truth  to  use  for  deception,  but  must  also 
see  that  it  is  used  on  the  side  of  truth. 

To  refuse  to  make  use  of  a  book  or  a  letter  to 
convey  one's  thoughts  or  get  at  the  thoughts  of 
others,  would  be  like  refusing  to  use  one's  strength 
of  voice  to  convey  to  many  people  at  once  what  one 
has  to  say ;  or  to  use  one's  ears  to  understand  what 
some  one  is  saying  in  a  loud  voice.  Jt  would  be 
like  refusing  to  acknowledge  the  possibility  of  con- 
veying thought  except  tete-a-tete,  or  when  conveyed 
in  a  whisper.  Writing  and  printing  have  but  multi- 
plied a  thousand,  a  hundred  thousand,  times  the 
number  of  people  by  whom  the  thoughts  expressed  may 
be  heard  ;  but  the  relation  between  him  who  expresses 
and  him  who  receives  the  thoughts  remains  as  before  : 
as  in  conversation  the  hearer  may  grasp  and  understand 
what  is  said,  or  may  let  it  go  in  at  one  ear  and  out  at 
the  other,  so  it  is  with  printed  matter.  As  the  reader 
of  a  book  may  twist  it  this  way  or  that,  so  may  he  also 
do  who  hears  spoken  words.  As  in  books  (and  we 
constantly  see  this)  much  may  be  written  that  is 
superfluous  and  empty,  just  so  is  it  with  speech.  A 
difference  exists,  but  it  is  a  difference  that  is  sometimes 
to  the  advantage  of  vocal,  sometimes  of  printed  com- 
munications. The  advantage  of  vocal  communication 
is  that  the  hearer  feels  the  spirit  of  the  speaker,  but 
the  disadvantage  is  that  very  often  empty  talkers  (for 
instance  advocates)  having  a  gift  of  words,  sway  men 
not  by  their  reasonableness,  but  by  their  mastery  of 
oratorical  art,  which  is  not  the  case  with  books. 
Another  advantage  of  verbal  communication  is  that  a 
hearer  who  has  not  understood  a  matter  can  ask  ques- 
tions, but  there  is  the  accompanying  disadvantage  that 
those  who  have  failed  to  understand  (often  purposely 
failed)  can  put  questions  which  are  not  to  the  point, 
and  can  thus  divert  the  stream  of  thought,  which  is  not 
the  case  with  books.  The  disadvantages  of  books  are  : 
First,  that  paper  can  endure  all  things,  and  people  can 
have  any  nonsense  printed,  causing  enormous  labour 
to  be  wasted  in  papermaking  and  typesetting  ;  which  is 


LETTER  TO  PETER  VERIGIN— I         169 

not  the  case  with  vocal  communication,  for  people 
can  refuse  to  listen  to  nonsense.  Secondly,  that  books 
are  multiplying  enormously,  so  that  the  good  ones 
get  lost  in  the  sea  of  empty  and  harmful  ones.  But 
then  again  the  advantages  of  the  press  are  very  great ; 
and  consist  chiefly  in  the  fact  that  the  circle  of  hearers 
is  extended  a  hundredfold,  or  a  thousandfold,  as  com- 
pared to  the  hearers  of  the  spoken  word.  And  this  in- 
crease of  the  circle  of  readers  is  important  not  because 
there  are  many  readers,  but  because  among  the  millions 
of  people  of  different  nations  and  stations  to  whom  a 
book  becomes  accessible,  those  who  share  similar 
thoughts  discover  one  another,  and  while  living 
thousands  of  miles  apart,  not  knowing  one  another,  are 
yet  united  and  live  by  one  spirit,  having  the  spiritual 
joy  and  encouragement  of  feeling  that  they  are  not 
alone.  Such  communication  1  now  have  with  you  and 
with  many,  many  men  of  other  nations — men  who  have 
never  seen  me  but  who  yet  are  nearer  to  me  than  sons 
or  brothers  of  my  own  blood.  The  chief  consideration 
in  favour  of  books  is,  that  since  men  reached  a  certain 
stage  in  development  of  the  external  conditions  of 
life — books,  and  printing  in  general,  have  become  a 
means  of  communication  among  men,  and  must,  there- 
fore, not  be  neglected.  So  many  harmful  books 
have  been  written  and  circulated,  that  the  evil  can  only 
be  met  by  other  books.  One  wedge  drives  out  another. 
Christ  said  :  '  What  I  tell  you  in  the  ear,  proclaim 
upon  the  housetops. '  Printing  is  just  that  proclamation 
from  the  housetops.  The  printed  word  is  a  tongue — a 
tongue  that  reaches  very  far ;  and  for  this  reason  all 
that  is  said  of  the  tongue  relates  also  to  the  printed 
word :  '  Therewith  bless  we  God,  and  therewith  curse 
we  men,  made  after  the  likeness  of  God.'  Therefore 
one  cannot  be  too  careful  what  one  says  and  listens  to, 
nor  what  one  prints  and  reads.  I  write  all  this  not 
that  I  think  you  understand  the  matter  differently 
(from  your  letter  I  conclude  that  you  understand  the 
matter  as  I  do)  but  because  these  thoughts  have  come 
into  my  head,  and  I  wish  to  share  them  with  you.     In 


170  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

your  letter  I  was  particularly  pleased  by  your  saying- : 
'  If  we  observed  all  that  has  already  been  given  us  from 
above,  we  should  be  quite  happy.  What  is  necessary 
and  right,  must  certainly  exist  in  everyone,  and  comes 
directly  from  above,  or  is  found  in  one's  self/  That  is 
quite  true,  and  is  just  how  1  understand  man's  nature. 
Every  man  can  undoubtedly  know  the  truth  of  God — 
all  he  need  know  to  fulfil  what  God  demands  of  him  in 
this  life — if  only  this  truth  revealed  to  man  be  not 
darkened  by  false  human  interpretations.  Therefore  to 
know  God's  truth,  man  should  first  of  all  discard  all 
false  interpretations,  and  all  the  snares  of  the  world 
tempting  him  to  accept  those  interpretations,  and  then 
truth  alone  will  remain,  and  will  be  accessible  to  little 
children,  for  it  is  native  to  the  soul  of  man.  The  chief 
difficulty  is,  when  discarding  falsehood,  not  to  throw 
away  with  it  some  part  of  the  truth,  and  when  explain- 
ing truth  not  to  introduce  new  errors. 

Thank  you,  dear  brother,  for  the  greetings  you  sent 
me.  Write  to  me  in  Moscow,  if  there  is  no  obstacle 
to  your  doing  so.  Cannot  I  be  of  any  service  to  you  ? 
You  would  please  me  very  much  if  you  would  give  me 
some  commission  to  execute. 

I  embrace  you  as  a  brother. 

Leo  Tolstoy. 

[November  21,  o.s.,  1895.] 

This  letter  and  the  one  that  follows  were  written  to  Peter 
Verigin  while  he  was  at  Obdorsk,  a  small  settlement  near 
the  mouth  of  the  river  Obi  in  Northern  Siberia,  undergoing 
his  fifteen  years'  exile.  He  was  released  in  1902,  and  re- 
joined his  sect  in  Canada. 


XI 

LETTER    TO    PETER    VERiGIN,    THE 
DOUKHOBOR  LEADER— II 

Dear  Friend, 

I  received  your  letter  yesterday,  and  hasten  to 
reply.  Letters  from  you  and  to  you  are  long  on  the 
road,  and  I  have  not  long  to  live. 

In  your  arguments  against  books  there  is  very  much 
that  is  just  and  ingenious  (for  instance,  the  comparison 
to  a  medical  assistant  and  a  doctor)  but  the  arguments 
themselves  are  invalid,  chiefly  because  you  contrast 
books  with  living  intercourse,  as  though  a  book  ex- 
cluded living  intercourse.  In  reality,  the  one  does 
not  exclude,  but  helps,  the  other. 

To  speak  frankly,  your  stubborn  contention  against 
books  seems  to  me  a  peculiarly  sectarian  method  of 
defending  a  once  accepted  and  expressed  opinion. 
And  such  peculiarity  does  not  accord  with  the  concep- 
tion I  had  formed  of  your  intellect,  and  especially  of 
your  candour  and  sincerity.  God  leads  men  to  Himself, 
and  to  the  performance  of  His  will,  by  all  paths  :  they 
move  consciously  when  they  try  to  do  His  will,  and 
unconsciously  when,  as  they  suppose,  they  are  doing 
their  own  will. 

To  accomplish  God's  will — to  establish  His  kingdom 
on  earth — union  among  men  is  needed,  that  all  may  be 
one,  as  Jesus  felt  himself  to  be  one  witli  the  Father. 
For  this  union,  we  need  (1)  an  internal  means  :  the 
recognition  and  clear  expression  of  truth,  such  as 
Jesus  achieved,  and  such  as  unites  all  men  ;  and  (2) 
an  external  means  :  the  diffusion  of  this  expression  of 
[  171  ] 


172  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

truth  —  a  diffusion  accomplished  by  very  diverse 
methods  :  by  trade,  and  conquest,  and  travel,  aud 
books,  and  railroads,  and  telegraphs,  and  in  many 
other  ways,  some  of  which,  such  as  conquest,  I  have 
to  repudiate,  but  others,  such  as  books  and  means  of 
rapid  communication,  I  have  no  cause  to  repudiate, 
and  cannot  (unless  I  wish  to  deprive  myself  of  a  con- 
venient means  of  serving  God)  refuse  to  utilize.  As  to 
your  argument  that  to  produce  books  and  railroads 
people  have  to  burrow  underground  for  ore  and  to 
work  at  a  furnace,  why — all  that  has  to  be  done  before 
one  can  have  even  a  ploughshare,  or  spade,  or  a 
scythe.  And  there  is  nothing  bad  in  burrowing  under- 
ground for  ore,  or  working  at  a  furnace  ;  and  when  I 
was  young  I  would  willingly  have  burrowed  under- 
ground or  worked  at  a  furnace,  to  show  my  spirit,  and 
so  would  any  good  young  fellow  to-day,  provided  the 
work  were  not  compulsory,  nor  for  life,  and  were  sur- 
rounded by  all  the  conveniences  which  will  certainly 
be  devised  as  soon  as  everyone  is  expected  to  work,  and 
the  labour  is  not  put  on  wage-slaves  only. 

But  let  us  not  pursue  this  subject ;  only  believe  me 
that  if  I  write  to  you  thus,  I  do  it  neither  because  I 
have  written  many  books  and  still  write  them — I  most 
heartily  agree  with  you,  that  the  very  simplest  good 
life  is  more  precious  than  the  most  beautiful  of  books 
— nor  because  thanks  to  books  I  come  into  touch  with 
other  men — as  happened  this  autumn  with  a  Hindu 
who  fully  shares  our  Christian  outlook  (and  who  has 
sent  me  an  English  book  by  a  lady,  his  compatriot, 
explaining  the  teachings  of  the  Brahmans  in  conformity 
with  the  essentials  of  Christ's  teaching),  and  again  with 
some  Japs  who  profess  and  teach  a  quite  Christian 
morality,  and  two  of  whom  visited  me  a  few  days  ago. 
Not  by  these  things  am  I  withheld  from  agreeing  with 
you,  and  from  condemning  book-printing,  railroads, 
telephones,  and  other  such  things — but  because  when 
1  see  an  ant-hill  in  the  meadow  I  cannot  admit  that  the 
ants  have  been  mistaken  in  constructing  that  hill,  and 
doing  all  they  are  doing  in  it.     And  in  the  same  way, 


LETTER  TO  PETER  VEIlfGIN— II         173 

looking  at  all  the  material  labours  mankind  has  accom- 
plished^ I  cannot  admit  that  they  have  done  it  all  by 
mistake.  As  a  man  and  not  an  ant,  I  see  defects  in 
the  human  ant-hill,  and  cannot  but  wish  to  rectify 
them — in  that  lies  my  share  of  the  common  work — but 
I  do  not  wish  to  destroy  the  whole  hill  of  human  labour, 
but  only  to  arrange  better  what  is  ill-arranged  in  it. 
And  in  the  human  ant-hill  there  is  very  much  that  is 
ill-arranged,  concerning  which  I  have  written  and  yet 
write,  have  suffered  and  yet  suffer,  and  which  as  far 
as  I  have  strength  I  try  to  alter. 

What  is  wrong  in  our  life  is,  first  and  foremost,  the 
fact  that  the  means  are  put  in  place  of  the  aim,  and  what 
should  be  the  aim  (the  welfare  of  our  fellow-men)  is  sacri- 
ficed to  the  means.  The  welfare  of  man,  even  his  life 
itself,  is  sacrificed  to  produce  things  of  which  only  some 
are  wanted  by  everyone,  but  some  of  which  are  only  good 
to  serve  the  caprice  of  a  single  man.  So  that  human 
lives  are  sacrificed  to  produce  articles  wanted  only  by  a 
few,  or  wanted  by  no  one,  or  that  are  even  simply 
harmful. 

What  is  wrong  is  that  people  forget,  have  forgotten, 
or  do  not  know,  that  (not  to  speak  of  the  production  of 
such  things  as  looking-glasses)  not  even  to  produce  the 
most  important  and  necessary  things — such  as  plough- 
shares or  scythes — is  it  permissible  or  justifiable  to 
sacrifice  a  single  life,  or  to  destroy  the  happiness  of  a 
single  man — even  the  most  apparently  insignificant ; 
for  the  meaning  of  human  life  lies  solely  in  the  welfare 
of  all  men.  To  infringe  the  life  and  welfare  of  any 
man  for  the  welfare  of  mankind  in  general,  is  the  same 
as  if  for  an  animaPs  welfare  we  were  to  cut  off  one  of 
his  limbs. 

That  is  where  the  terrible  mistake  of  our  times  is  to 
be  found  ;  not  in  the  fact  that  printing-offices,  rail- 
roads, and  other  such  things  exist,  but  in  the  fact  that 
men  consider  it  allowable  to  sacrifice  the  welfare,  were 
it  only  of  a  single  man,  for  the  accomplishment  of  any 
business  however  great.  As  soon  as  people  lose  sight 
of  the  meaning  and  aim  of  their  activity  (and  there  is 


174  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

only  one  aim — the  welfare  of  one's  neighbour),  as  soon 
as  they  decide  that  for  business  purposes  it  is  permis- 
sible to  sacrifice  the  life  and  welfare  of  a  single  old 
man,  burdensome  to  everyone,  or  even  of  an  idiot,  then 
it  becomes  permissible  to  sacrifice  those  who  are  less 
old  and  less  stupid,  and  no  limit  can  any  longer  be 
found — all  may  be  sacrificed  for  the  sake  of  business. 
That  is  what  is  wrong,  and  against  that  we  must  fight. 

It  should  be  understood  that,  however  useful  and 
important  book-printing,  railroads,  ploughs  and  scythes 
may  seem  to  us,  it  were  better  to  let  them  all  perish 
and  to  do  without  them,  until  we  can  learn  to  get  them 
without  destroying  the  happiness  and  life  of  men. 
That  is  the  whole  question  ;  and  it  is  here  people 
generally  get  confused,  trying  to  go  round  the  point  on 
one  side  or  the  other.  Some  say  :  e  You  want  to  destroy 
all  that  humanity  has  achieved  by  its  labour — you  wish 
to  return  to  barbarism,  for  the  sake  of  some  moral 
principle  or  other.  Moral  principles  are  wrong  if  they 
hinder  the  well-being  humanity  achieves  in  the  course 
of  its  progress/  Others  say  (and  I  fear  you  hold  this 
opinion,  and  it  is  an  opinion  people  attribute  to  me) 
that  since,  in  the  process  of  attaining  all  the  material 
ameliorations  of  life,  moral  principles  have  been  violated, 
therefore  all  these  ameliorations  must,  in  themselves, 
be  bad  and  should  be  abandoned. 

To  the  upholders  of  the  first  view  I  reply,  that  what 
is  needed  is  not  to  destroy  anything,  but  only  to 
remember  that  the  aim  of  humanity  is  the  welfare  of 
all,  and  that  consequently  as  soon  as  any  amelioration 
deprives  even  a  single  man  of  welfare,  that  amelioration 
should  be  abandoned,  and  not  introduced  until  means 
are  found  to  produce  it  and  to  use  it,  without  infring- 
ing the  welfare  of  any  single  man.  And  I  think  that 
with  such  a  view  of  life,  very  many  empty  and  harmful 
productions  would  be  abandoned,  while  we  should 
very  quickly  find  means  to  produce  what  is  really 
useful  without  infringing  the  welfare  of  any  man. 

To  the  upholders  of  the  second  view  I  reply,  that 
humanity  in  passing  from  the  stone  age  to  the  bronze  or 


LETTER  TO  PETER  VERIGIX— II        175 

iron  age,  and  progressing  to  its  present  material  condi- 
tion, cannot  have  made  a  mistake,  but  has  followed  an 
unalterable  law  of  progress,  and  to  turn  back  is,  I  will 
not  say  undesirable,  but  is  as  impossible  as  it  is  for  us 
again  to  become  monkeys  ;  and  that  the  problem  for  a 
man  of  to-day  is  not  to  dream  about  what  people  used 
to  be  like,  and  how  to  revert  to  what  they  were,  but  it 
is — to  serve  the  welfare  of  men  now  living.  And  what 
is  necessary  for  the  welfare  of  men  now  living  is — that 
some  men  should  not  torment  others  or  oppress  them, 
should  not  deprive  them  of  the  products  of  their  labour, 
nor  compel  them  to  work  at  things  they  do  not  need  or 
may  not  have  ;  and  chiefly  that  it  should  not  be  con- 
sidered possible  or  right,  for  the  sake  of  any  practical 
advantage  or  material  success,  to  sacrifice  the  life  or 
welfare  of  one's  neighbour,  or,  what  is  the  same  thing 
differently  expressed,  to  infringe  the  law  of  love. 

If  people  only  knew  that  the  aim  of  humanity  is  not 
material  progress,  but  that  that  progress  is  an  inevitable 
growth,  and  that  the  aim  is  simply  the  welfare  of  all 
men,  and  that  this  aim  is  superior  to  any  material  aim 
people  can  set  themselves,  then  everything  would  fall 
into  its  proper  place.  And  it  is  to  this,  people  of  our 
time  should  devote  all  their  strength. 

But  to  weep  because  men  cannot  now  live  without 
implements,  like  wild  beasts,  feeding  themselves  on 
fruits,  is  as  if  I,  an  old  man,  were  to  weep  for  lack 
of  teeth  and  black  hair  and  the  strength  I  had  in  my 
youth.  What  I  have  to  do  is,  not  to  insert  false  teeth, 
dye  my  hair,  and  do  gymnastics,  but  to  try  to  live  in 
the  way  natural-  for  an  old  man,  putting  first — not 
worldly  affairs,  but  the  affairs  of  God — union  and  love, 
and  admitting  worldly  affairs  only  in  so  far  as  they  do- 
not  infringe  God's  work.  The  same  should  be  done  by 
humanity  in  its  present  stage  of  existence. 

But  to  say  that  railroads,  gas,  electricity  and  book- 
printing  are  harmful,  because  for  their  sake  human 
lives  are  sacrificed,  is  like  saying  that  ploughing  and 
sowing  are  harmful — merely  because  I  ploughed  a  field 
at  the  wrong  time,  let  it  get  overgrown  with  weedsr 


176  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

and  then  sowed  seed  without  reploughing — that  is  to 
say,  did  things  out  of  turn  and  at  the  wrong  time. 

I  was  very  glad  to  see  what  you  write  about  your  own 
life  ;  and  that  even  in  the  difficult  circumstances  in 
which  you  are  placed  you  practise  what  you  preach — 
earning  your  bread  by  your  own  work.  In  nothing 
else  can  a  man's  sincerity  be  so  well  seen.  I  have  now 
become  very  faulty  in  that  respect :  surrounded  as  I  am 
by  all  kinds  of  luxury,  which  I  hate,  but  from  which 
I  have  not  the  strength  to  escape.  Your  example 
encourages  me,  and  I  do  not  cease  to  make  efforts. 

Thanks  for  sending  the  extract  from  your  diary. 
Concerning  thoughts  there  expressed  by  you,  I  should 
like  to  share  with  you  certain  observations  that  tend  in 
the  same  direction.     I  will  do  so  another  time. 

Farewell  meanwhile  ;  please  do  not  let  yourself  feel 
any  ill  will  towards  me  for  my  reply  to  the  opinions 
expressed  not  only  in  your  letter  to  me,  but  also  in  the 
letter  to  E.  J.  You  are  very  dear  to  me,  and  I  try  to 
deal  as  straightforwardly  as  possible,  like  a  brother,  in 
relation  to  you. 

Yours  lovingly, 

Leo  Tolstoy. 

(October  14,  o.s.,  1896.] 


XII 

LETTER  ON  NON-RESISTANCE  :  TO  ERNEST  H. 
CROSBY,  OF  NEW  YORK 

Dear  Mr.  Crosby, 

I  am  very  glad  to  have  news  of  your  activity,  and 
to  hear  that  your  work  begins  to  attract  attention. 
Fifty  years  ago  Lloyd  Garrison's  Declaration  of  Non- 
Resistance*  only  estranged  people  from  him ;  and 
Ballou'st  fifty  years'  labour  in  the  same  direction  was 
constantly  met  by  a  conspiracy  of  silence.  I  now  read 
with  great  pleasure  in  the  Voice  admirable  thoughts  by 
American  writers  on  this  question  of  Non-Resistance. 
I  need  only  demur  to  the  notion  expressed  by  Mr. 
Bemis.  It  is  an  old  but  unfounded  libel  upon  Christ 
to  suppose  that  the  expulsion  of  the  cattle  from  the 
temple  indicates  that  Jesus  beat  people  with  a  whip 
and  advised  his  disciples  to  behave  in  the  same  way.  % 

The  opinions  expressed  by  these  writers,  especially 
by  Heber  Newton  and  G.  D.  Herron,  are  quite  correct, 
but  unfortunately  they  do  not  reply  to  the  question 
Christ  put  to  men,  but  to  another  question  which  has 
been  substituted  for  it  by  those  chief  and  most  dangerous 

*  The  Declaration  of  Non  -  Resistance  drawn  up  by 
William  Lloyd  Garrison  was  adopted  at  a  Peace  Convention 
held  in  Boston,  September  18-20,  1838. 

f  Adin  Ballou  (1803-1890),  a  Massachusetts  Restorationist 
minister,  founder  of  Hopedale  Community  (1842-1856),  and 
author  of  Christian  Non-Resistance. 

X  Christ's  use  of  a  scourge  is  mentioned  only  in  St.  John's 
Gospel.     Our  Revised  Version,  following  the  Greek,  indi- 
cates that  the  scourge  was  for  '  the  sheep  and  the  oxen.' 
[  177  ]  m 


178  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

opponents  of  Christianity — the  so-called  c  orthodox ' 
ecclesiastical  authorities. 

Mr.  Higginson  says,  (1  do  not  believe  Non-Resist- 
ance admissible  as  a  universal  rule/  Heber  Newton 
says  that  ( People's  opinion  as  to  the  practical  results  of 
the  application  of  Christ's  teaching  will  depend  on  the 
extent  of  people's  belief  in  his  authority.'  Carlos 
Martyn  considers  'The  transition  stage  in  which  we 
live  not  suited  for  the  application  of  the  doctrine  of 
Non-Resistance.'  G.  D.  Herron  holds  'That  to  obey 
the  law  of  Non-Resistance  we  must  learn  how  to  apply 
it  to  life.'  Mrs.  Livermore,  thinking  that  the  law  of 
Non-Resistance  can  be  fully  obeyed  only  in  the  future, 
says  the  same. 

All  these  views  refer  to  the  question,  *  What  would 
happen  if  people  were  all  obliged  to  obey  the  law  of 
Non-Resistance?'  But,  in  the  first  place,  it  is  im- 
possible to  oblige  everyone  to  accept  this  law.  Secondly, 
if  it  were  possible  to  do  so,  such  compulsion  would  in 
itself  be  a  direct  negation  of  the  very  principle  set  up. 
Oblige  all  men  to  refrain  from  violence  !  Who  then 
would  enforce  the  decision  ?  Thirdly,  and  this  is  the 
chief  point,  the  question  as  put  by  Christ  is  not  at  all, 
Can  Non-Resistance  become  a  general  law  for  hu- 
manity? but,  How  must  each  man  act  to  fulfil  his 
allotted  task,  to  save  his  soul,  and  to  do  the  will 
of  God? — which  are  all  really  one  and  the  same 
thing. 

Christian  teaching  does  not  lay  down  laws  for  every- 
body, and  does  not  say  to  people,  '  You  all,  for  fear  of 
punishment,  must  obey  such  and  such  rules,  and  then 
you  will  all  be  happy';  but  it  explains  to  each  indi- 
vidual his  position  in  relation  to  the  world,  and  lets 
him  see  what  results,  for  him  individually,  inevitably 
flow  from  that  relation.  Christianity  says  to  man  (and 
to  each  man  separately)  that  his  personal  life  can  have 
no  rational  meaning  if  he  counts  it  as  belonging  to  him- 
self, or  as  having  for  its  aim  worldly  happiness  for 
himself  or  for  other  people.  This  is  so  because  the 
happiness  he  seeks  is  unattainable  :  (1)  because,  as  all 


LETTER  ON  NON-RESISTANCE  179 

beings  strive  after  worldly  advantages,  the  gain  of  one 
is  the  loss  of  others,  and  it  is  most  probable  that  each 
individual  will  incur  much  superfluous  suffering  in  the 
course  of  his  vain  efforts  to  seize  unattainable  blessings  ; 
(2)  because,  even  if  a  man  get  worldly  advantages,  the 
more  he  obtains  the  less  they  satisfy  him  and  the  more 
he  hankers  after  fresh  ones ;  (3)  and  chiefly  because 
the  longer  a  man  lives,  the  more  inevitable  becomes 
the  approach  of  old  age,  sickness,  and  of  death,  destroy- 
ing all  possibility  of  worldly  advantages. 

So  that  if  a  man  considers  his  life  his  own,  to  be 
spent  in  seeking  worldly  happiness  for  himself  as  well 
as  for  others,  then  that  life  can  have  no  rational 
explanation  for  him. 

Life  has  a  rational  meaning  only  when  one  under- 
stands that  to  consider  our  life  our  own,  or  to  see  its 
aim  in  worldly  happiness  for  ourselves  or  for  other 
people,  is  a  delusion  ;  that  a  man's  life  does  not  belong 
to  him  who  has  received  it,  but  to  Him  who  has  given 
it ;  and  its  object  should,  therefore,  be,  not  the  attain- 
ment of  worldly  happiness  either  for  one's  self  or  for 
other  individuals,  but  solely  the  fulfilment  of  the  will 
of  Him  who  created  this  life. 

This  conception  alone  gives  life  a  rational  meaning, 
and  makes  its  aim  (which  is  to  fulfil  the  will  of  God) 
attainable.  And,  most  important  of  all,  only  when 
enlightened  by  this  conception  does  man  see  clearly  the 
right  direction  for  his  own  activity.  Man  is  then  no 
longer  destined  to  suffer  and  to  despair,  as  was  inevit- 
able under  the  former  conception. 

'The  universe  and  I  in  it/  says  to  himself  a  man 
with  this  conception,  ? exist  by  the  will  of  God.  ^  I 
cannot  know  the  whole  of  the  universe  (for  in  its 
immensity  it  transcends  my  comprehension),  nor  can 
I  know  my  own  position  in  it,  but  I  do  know  with  cer- 
tainty what  God,  who  has  sent  me  into  the  world 
(infinite  in  time  and  space,  and  therefore  incomprehen- 
sible to  me),  demands  from  me.  This  is  revealed  to  me 
(1)  by  the  collective  wisdom  of  the  best  men  who  have 
gone   before   me,  i.e.,  by   tradition,    (2)   bv   my   own 

it— 2 


180  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

reason,  and  (3)  by  my  heart,  i.e.,  by  the  highest  aspira- 
tion of  my  nature. 

Tradition  (the  collective  wisdom  of  our  greatest  fore- 
runners) tells  me  that  I  should  do  unto  others  as  I 
would  that  they  should  do  unto  me. 

My  reason  shows  me  that  only  by  all  men  acting 
thus  is  the  highest  happiness  for  all  men  attainable. 

Only  when  I  yield  myself  to  that  intuition  of  love 
which  demands  obedience  to  this  law,  is  my  own  heart 
happy  and  at  rest.  And  not  only  can  I  then  know  how 
to  act,  but  I  can  and  do  discern  the  work  to  co-operate 
in  which  my  activity  was  designed  and  is  required. 

I  cannot  fathom  God's  whole  design,  for  the  sake  of 
which  the  universe  exists  and  lives ;  but  the  Divine 
work  which  is  being  accomplished  in  this  world  and 
in  which  I  participate  by  living  is  comprehensible 
to  me. 

This  work  is  the  annihilation  of  discord  and  strife 
among  men  and  among  all  creatures,  and  the  establish- 
ment of  the  highest  unity  and  concord  and  love. 

It  i/s  the  fulfilment  of  the  promises  of  the  Hebrew 
prophet  who  foretold  a  time  when  all  men  should  be 
taught  by  truth,  when  spears  should  be  turned  into 
reaping-hooks,  swords  be  beaten  to  ploughshares,  and 
the  lion  lie  down  with  the  lamb. 

So  that  a  man  of  Christian  intelligence  not  only 
knows  what  he  has  to  do,  but  he  also  understands  the 
work  he  is  doing. 

He  has  to  act  so  as  to  co-operate  towards  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  kingdom  of  God  on  earth.  For  this  a 
man  must  obey  his  intuition  of  God's  will,  i.e.,  must 
act  lovingly  towards  others,  as  he  would  that  others 
should  act  towards  him. 

Thus  the  intuitive  demands  of  man's  soul  coincide 
with  the  external  aim  of  life  which  he  sees  before 
him. 

According  to  Christian  teaching,  man  in  this  world 
is  God's  labourer.  A  labourer  does  not  know  his 
master's  whole  design,  but  he  does  know  the  immediate 
object  which  he  is  set  to  work  at.     He  receives  definite 


LETTER  ON  NON-RESISTANCE  181 

instructions  what  to  do,  and  especially  what  not  to  do, 
lest  he  hinder  the  attainment  of  the  very  aims  towards 
which  his  labour  should  tend.  For  the  rest  he  has  full 
liberty  given  him.  And,  therefore,  for  a  man  who  has 
grasped  the  Christian  conception  of  life,  the  meaning 
of  his  life  is  perfectly  plain  and  reasonable,  nor  can  he 
have  a  moment's  hesitation  as  to  how  he  should  act,  or 
what  he  should  do  to  fulfil  the  object  for  which  he 
lives. 

And  yet  in  spite  of  such  a  twofold  indication  (clear 
and  indubitable  to  a  man  of  Christian  understanding)  of 
what  is  the  real  aim  and  meaning  of  human  life,  and  of 
what  men  should  do  and  should  not  do,  we  find  people 
(and  people  calling  themselves  Christians)  who  decide 
that,  in  such  and  such  circumstances,  men  ought  to 
abandon  God's  law  and  reason's  guidance  and  to  act  in 
opposition  to  them,  because  (according  to  their  concep- 
tion) the  effects  of  actions  performed  in  submission  to 
God's  law  may  be  detrimental  or  inconvenient. 

According  to  the  law  contained  alike  in  tradition,  in 
our  reason,  and  in  our  hearts,  man  should  always  do 
unto  others  as  he  would  that  they  should  do  unto  him  ; 
he  should  always  co-operate  in  the  development  of  love 
and  union  among  created  beings.  But,  in  the  judg- 
ment of  these  far-sighted  people,  on  the  contrary,  as 
long  as  in  their  opinion  it  is  premature  to  obey  this 
law,  man  should  do  violence — imprison  or  kill  people — 
and  thereby  evoke  anger  and  venom  instead  of  loving 
union  in  the  hearts  of  men.  It  is  as  though  a  brick- 
layer, set  to  do  a  particular  task  and  knowing  that  he 
was  co-operating  with  others  to  build  a  house,  after 
receiving  clear  and  precise  instructions  from  the  master 
himself  how  to  build  a  certain  wall,  accepted  orders 
from  some  fellow-bricklayers  (who  like  himself  knew 
neither  the  plan  of  the  house,  nor  what  would  fit  in 
with  it)  to  cease  building  his  wall,  and,  instead,  to  pull 
down  a  wall  that  other  workmen  had  erected. 

Astonishing  delusion  !  A  being  who  breathes  to-day 
and  has  vanished  to-morrow  receives  one  definite 
indubitable  law  to  guide  him  through  the  brief  term 


182  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

of  his  life  ;  but,  instead  of  obeying  that  law,  he  prefers 
to  fancy  that  he  knows  what  is  necessary,  advantageous, 
and  well-timed  for  men  and  for  all  the  world — this 
world  which  continually  changes  and  evolves — and  for 
the  sake  of  some  advantage  (which  each  man  pictures 
after  his  own  fancy)  he  decides  that  he  and  other  people 
should,  temporarily,  abandon  the  indubitable  law  given 
to  him  and  to  all  men,  and  should  act,  not  as  he  would 
that  others  should  act  towards  him,  nor  to  bring  love 
into  'the  world — but  should  do  violence,  imprison,  kill, 
and  bring  into  the  world  enmity  whenever  it  seems  to 
him  advisable  to  do  so.  And  he  decides  to  act  thus, 
though  he  knows  that  the  most  horrible  cruelties, 
martyrdoms,  and  murders — from  the  Inquisition,  and 
the  murders  and  horrors  of  all  the  revolutions,  down  to 
the  brutalities  of  contemporary  Anarchists  and  their 
slaughter  by  the  established  authorities — have  only 
occurred  because  people  will  imagine  that  they  know 
what  is  necessary  for  mankind  and  for  the  world.  But 
are  there  not  always,  at  any  given  moment,  two  oppo- 
site parties,  each  of  which  declares  that  it  is  necessary 
to  use  force  against  the  other  ?  The  '  law-and-order ' 
party  against  the  Anarchist,  the  Anarchist  against  the 
'  law-and-order  '  men  ;  English  against  Americans,  and 
Americans  against  English  ;  Germans  against  English, 
and  English  against  Germans,  and  so  forth  in  all 
possible  combinations  and  rearrangements. 

A  man  enlightened  by  Christianity  sees  that  he  has 
no  reason  to  abandon  the  law  of  God,  given  to  enable 
him  to  walk  sure-footedly  through  life,  in  order  to 
follow  the  chance,  inconstant,  and  often  contradictory 
demands  of  men.  But  besides  this,  if  he  has  lived  a 
Christian  life  for  some  time  and  has  developed  in  him- 
self a  moral  Christian  sensibility,  he  literally  cannot  act 
as  people  demand  of  him.  Not  his  reason  alone  but 
his  feeling  also  makes  it  impossible. 

To  many  people  of  our  society  it  would  be  impossible 
to  torture  or  kill  a  baby,  even  if  they  were  told  that 
by  so  doing  they  could  save  hundreds  of  other  people. 
And  in  the  same  way,  a  man  who  has  developed  a 


LETTER  ON  NON-RESISTANCE  183 

Christian  sensibility  of  heart  finds  a  whole  series  of 
actions  become  impossible  for  him.  For  instance,  a 
Christian  who  is  obliged  to  take  part  in  judicial  pro- 
ceedings in  which  a  man  may  be  sentenced  to  death, 
or  who  is  obliged  to  take  part  in  evictions  or  in  debating 
a  proposal  leading  to  war,  or  to  participate  in  prepara- 
tions for  war  (not  to  mention  war  itself),  is  in  a  position 
parallel  to  that  of  a  kindly  man  called  on  to  torture  or 
to  kill  a  baby.  It  is  not  reason  alone  that  forbids  him 
to  do  what  is  demanded  of  him  ;  he  feels  instinctively 
that  he  cannot  do  it.  For  certain  actions  are  morally 
impossible,  just  as  others  are  physically  impossible.  As 
a  man  cannot  lift  a  mountain,  and  as  a  kindly  man 
cannot  kill  an  infant,  so  a  man  living  a  Christian  life 
cannot  take  part  in  deeds  of  violence.  Of  what  value 
to  him,  then,  are  arguments  about  the  imaginary 
advantages  of  doing  what  it  is  morally  impossible  for 
him  to  do  ? 

But  how  is  a  man  to  act  when  he  sees  clearly  the  evil 
of  following  the  law  of  love  and  its  corollary  law  of 
Non-Resistance  ?  How  (to  use  the  stock  example)  is 
a  man  to  act  when  he  sees  a  robber  killing  or  outraging 
a  child,  and  he  can  only  save  the  child  by  killing  the 
robber  ? 

When  such  a  case  is  put,  it  is  generally  assumed  that 
the  only  possible  reply  is  that  one  should  kill  the  robber 
to  save  the  child.  But  this  answer  is  given  so  quickly 
and  decidedly  only  because  we  are  all  so  accustomed  to 
the  use  of  violence — not  only  to  save  a  child,  but  even 
to  prevent  a  neighbouring  Government  altering  its 
frontier  at  the  expense  of  ours,  or  someone  from 
smuggling  lace  across  that  frontier,  or  even  to  defend 
our  garden  fruit  from  a  passer-by. 

It  is  assumed  that  to  save  the  child  the  robber  should 
be  killed.  But  it  is  only  necessary  to  consider  the 
question,  on  what  grounds  a  man  (whether  he  be  or  be 
not  a  Christian)  ought  to  act  so,  in  order  to  come  to  the 
conclusion  that  such  action  has  no  reasonable  founda- 
tion, and  only  seems  to  us  necessary  because  up  to  two 
thousand  years  ago  such  conduct  was  considered  right, 


184  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

and  a  habit  of  acting  so  was  formed.  Why  should  a 
non-Christian — not  acknowledging  God,  nor  regarding 
the  fulfilment  of  His  will  as  the  aim  of  life — decide  to 
kill  the  robber  in  order  to  defend  the  child  ?  By  killing 
the  robber,  he  certainly  kills  ;  whereas  he  cannot  know 
positively  whether  the  robber  would  have  killed  the 
child  or  not.  But  letting  that  pass,  who  shall  say 
whether  the  child's  life  was  more  needed,  was  better, 
than  the  robber's  life  ? 

Surely,  if  the  non-Christian  knows  not  God  nor  sees 
life's  meaning  in  the  performance  of  His  will,  the  only 
rule  for  his  actions  must  be  a  reckoning,  a  conception, 
of  what  is  more  profitable  for  him  and  for  all  men  :  a 
continuation  of  the  robber's  life  or  of  the  child's.  To 
decide  that,  he  needs  to  know  what  would  become  of 
the  child  whom  he  saves,  and  what — had  he  not  killed 
him — would  have  been  the  future  of  the  robber  he  kills. 
And  as  he  cannot  know  this,  the  non-Christian  has  no 
sufficient  rational  ground  for  killing  a  robber  to  save 
a  child. 

If  a  man  is  a  Christian,  and  consequently  acknow- 
ledges God  and  sees  the  meaning  of  life  in  fulfilling 
His  will,  then,  however  ferocious  the  robber,  however 
innocent  and  lovely  the  child,  he  has  even  less  ground 
to  abandon  the  God-given  law  and  to  do  to  the  robber 
what  the  robber  wishes  to  do  to  the  child.  He  may 
plead  with  the  robber,  may  interpose  his  own  body 
between  the  robber  and  the  victim,  but  there  is  one 
thing  he  cannot  do  :  he  cannot  deliberately  abandon 
the  law  he  has  received  from  God,  the  fulfilment  of 
which  alone  gives  meaning  to  his  life.  Very  probably 
bad  education,  or  his  animal  nature,  may  cause  a  man 
(Christian  or  non-Christian)  to  kill  the  robber,  not 
only  to  save  the  child,  but  even  to  save  himself  or  his 
purse,  but  it  does  not  follow  that  he  is  right  in  acting 
thus,  nor  that  he  should  accustom  himself  or  others  to 
think  such  conduct  right. 

What  it  does  show  is  that,  notwithstanding  a  coating 
of  education  and  of  Christianity,  the  habits  of  the 
Stone  Age  are  yet  so  strong  in  man,  that  he  still  com- 


LETTER  ON  NON-RESISTANCE  185 

mits  actions  long  since  condemned  by  his  reasonable 
conscience. 

I  see  a  robber  killing  a  child,  and  I  can  save  the 
child  by  killing  the  robber — therefore  in  certain  cases 
violence  must  be  used  to  resist  evil.  A  man's  life  is  in 
danger,  and  can  be  saved  only  by  my  telling  a  lie — 
therefore  in  certain  cases  one  must  lie.  A  man  is 
starving,  and  one  can  save  him  only  by  stealing — there- 
fore in  certain  cases  one  must  steal. 

I  lately  read  a  story  by  Coppee,  in  which  an  orderly 
kills  his  officer,  whose  life  was  insured,  and  thereby 
saves  the  honour  and  the  family  of  the  officer.  There- 
fore in  certain  cases  one  must  kill. 

Such  inventions,  and  the  deductions  from  them,  only 
prove  that  there  are  men  who  know  that  it  is  not  well 
to  steal,  to  lie,  or  to  kill,  but  who  are  still  so  unwilling 
that  people  should  cease  to  do  these  things,  that  they 
use  all  their  mental  powers  to  invent  excuses  for  such 
conduct.  There  is  no  moral  law  concerning  which  we 
may  not  devise  a  case  in  which  it  is  difficult  to  decide 
what  is  more  moral :  to  disobey  the  law  or  to  obey  it  ? 
But  all  such  inventions  fail  to  prove  that  the  laws, 
e  thou  shalt  not  lie,  steal,  or  kill/  are  invalid. 

It  is  the  same  with  reference  to  the  law  of  Non- 
Resistance.  People  know  it  is  wrong  to  use  violence, 
but  they  are  so  anxious  to  continue  to  live  a  life  secured 
by  the  e  strong  arm  of  the  law/  that — instead  of  devot- 
ing their  intellects  to  the  elucidation  of  the  evils  which 
have  flowed  and  are  still  flowing  from  admitting  that 
man  has  a  right  to  use  violence  to  his  fellow-men — 
they  prefer  to  exert  their  mental  powers  in  defence  of 
that  error. 

c  Fais  ce  que  dots,  advienne  que  pourra  *  ('  Do  what's 
right,  come  what  may ')  is  an  expression  of  profound 
wisdom.  We  each  can  know  indubitably  what  we 
ought  to  do,  but  what  results  will  follow  from  our 
actions  none  of  us  either  knows  or  can  know.  There- 
fore it  follows  that,  besides  feeling  the  call  of  duty, 
we  are  further  driven  to  act  as  duty  bids  us,  by  the 
consideration   that   we   have   no   other   guidance,   but 


186  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

are  totally  ignorant  of  what  will  result  from  our 
actions. 

Christian  teaching  indicates  what  a  man  should  do  to 
perform  the  will  of  Him  who  sent  him  into  life ;  but 
discussion  as  to  what  results  we  anticipate  from  such 
or  such  human  actions  have  nothing  to  do  with 
Christianity,  but  are  just  an  example  of  the  error 
Christianity  eliminates. 

None  of  us  has  ever  yet  met  the  imaginary  robber 
with  the  imaginary  child,  but  all  the  horrors  which  fill 
the  annals  of  history  and  of  our  own  times  came  and 
come  from  this  one  thing — that  people  will  believe  that 
they  can  foresee  the  results  of  hypothetical  future 
actions. 

The  case  is  this :  People  once  lived  an  animal  life, 
and  violated  or  killed  whom  they  thought  well  to  violate 
or  to  kill.  They  even  ate  each  other  ;  and  public 
opinion  approved  of  it.  Thousands  of  years  ago,  as  far 
back  as  the  times  of  Moses,  a  day  came  when  people 
realized  that  to  violate  or  kill  each  other  is  bad.  But 
there  were  people  for  whom  the  reign  of  force  was 
advantageous,  and  these  did  not  approve  of  the  change, 
but  assured  themselves  and  others  that  to  do  deeds  of 
violence  and  to  kill  people  is  not  always  bad,  but  that 
there  are  circumstances  when  it  is  necessary  and  even 
moral.  And  violence  and  even  slaughter,  though  not 
so  frequent  or  so  cruel  as  before,  continued — only  with 
this  difference,  that  those  who  committed  or  commended 
such  acts  excused  themselves  by  pleading  that  they  did 
it  for  the  benefit  of  humanity. 

It  was  just  this  sophistical  justification  of  violence 
that  Christ  denounced.  When  two  enemies  fight,  each 
may  think  his  own  conduct  justified  by  the  circum- 
stances. Excuses  can  be  made  for  every  use  of  violence ; 
and  no  infallible  standard  has  ever  been  discovered  by 
which  to  measure  the  worth  of  these  excuses.  There- 
fore Christ  taught  us  to  believe  in  no  excuse  for 
violence,  and  (contrary  to  what  had  been  taught  by 
them  of  old  time)  never  to  use  violence. 

One  would  have  thought  that  those  who  professed 


LETTER  ON  NON-RESISTANCE  187 

Christianity  would  have  been  indefatigable  in  exposing 
deception  in  this  matter,  for  such  an  exposure  forms 
one  of  the  chief  features  of  Christianity.  What  really 
happened  was  just  the  reverse.  People  who  profited  by 
violence,  and  who  did  not  wish  to  give  up  their  advan- 
tages, took  on  themselves  a  monopoly  of  Christian 
preaching,  and  declared  that  as  cases  can  be  found  in 
which  Non-Resistance  causes  more  harm  than  the  use 
of  violence  (the  imaginary  robber  killing  the  imaginary 
child),  therefore  Christ's  doctrine  of  Non-Resistance 
need  not  always  be  followed,  and  that  one  may  deviate 
from  his  teaching  to  defend  one's  life  or  the  life  of  others, 
to  defend  one's  country,  to  save  society  from  lunatics  or 
criminals,  and  in  many  other  cases.  The  decision  of 
the  question,  In  what  cases  should  Christ's  teaching  be 
set  aside  ?  was  left  to  the  very  people  who  employed 
violence.  So  that  it  ended  by  Christ's  teaching,  on  the 
subject  of  not  resisting  evil,  by  violence  being  com- 
pletely annulled.  And,  worst  of  all,  the  very  people 
Christ  denounced  came  to  consider  themselves  the  sole 
preachers  and  expositors  of  his  doctrines.  But  the  light 
shines  through  the  darkness,  and  Christ's  teaching  is 
again  exposing  the  pseudo-teachers  of  Christianity. 

We  may  think  about  rearranging  the  world  to  suit 
our  own  taste — no  one  can  prevent  that — and  we  may 
try  to  do  what  seems  to  us  pleasant  or  profitable, 
and  with  that  object  treat  our  fellow-creatures  with 
violence  on  the  pretext  that  we  are  doing  good.  But 
acting  thus  we  cannot  pretend  to  follow  Christ's  teach- 
ing, for  Christ  denounced  just  this  deception.  Truth 
sooner  or  later  reappears,  and  the  false  teachers  are 
unmasked,  which  is  just  what  is  happening  to-day. 

Only  let  the  question  of  man's  life  be  rightly  put,  as 
Christ  put  it,  and  not  as  it  has  been  perversely  put  by 
the  Churches,  and  the  whole  structure  of  falsehood 
which  the  Churches  have  built  over  Christ's  teaching, 
will  collapse  of  itself. 

The  real  question  is  not  whether  it  would  be  good  or 
bad  for  a  certain  human  society  that  people  should 
follow  the  law  of  Love  and  the  consequent  law  of  Non- 


188  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

Resistance,  but  it  is  this,  Do  you,  who  to-day  live  and 
to-morrow  will  die — who  are  indeed  tending  deathward 
every  moment — do  you  wish  now,  immediately  and 
entirely,  to  obey  the  law  of  Him  who  sent  you  into  life, 
and  who  clearly  showed  you  His  will  alike  in  tradition 
and  in  your  mind  and  heart ;  or  do  you  prefer  to  resist 
his  will?  And  as  soon  as  the  question  is  put  thus, 
only  one  reply  is  possible — I  wish  now,  this  moment, 
without  delay  or  hesitation,  to  the  very  utmost  of  my 
strength,  neither  waiting  for  anyone  nor  counting  the 
cost,  to  do  that  which  alone  is  clearly  demanded  by 
Him  who  sent  me  into  the  world ;  and  on  no  account, 
and  under  no  conditions,  do  I  wish  to,  or  can  I, 
act  otherwise,  for  herein  lies  my  only  possibility  of  a 
rational  and  unharassed  life. 

[January  12,  o.s.,  1896.] 


XIII 

HOW  TO  READ  THE  GOSPELS,  AND  WHAT  IS 
ESSENTIAL  IN  THEM 

There  is  so  much  that  is  strange,  improbable,  unin- 
telligible, and  even  contradictory,  in  what  professes  to 
be  Christ's  teaching,  that  people  do  not  know  how  to 
understand  it. 

It  is  very  differently  understood  by  different  people. 
Some  say  Redemption  is  the  all-important  matter  ; 
others  say  the  all-important  thing  is  grace,  obtainable 
through  the  Sacraments  ;  others,  again,  that  submission 
to  the  Church  is  what  is  really  essential.  But  the 
Churches  themselves  disagree,  and  interpret  the  teach- 
ing variously.  The  Roman  Catholic  Church  holds  that 
the  Holy  Ghost  proceeds  from  the  Father  and  the  Son, 
that  the  Pope  is  infallible,  and  that  salvation  is  obtain- 
able chiefly  through  works.  The  Lutheran  Church 
disagrees,  and  considers  that  faith  is  what  is  chiefly 
needed  for  salvation.  The  Orthodox  Russo-Greek 
Church  considers  that  the  Holy  Ghost  proceeds  from 
the  Father  only,  and  that  both  works  and  faith  are 
necessary  to  salvation.  And  the  Anglican  and  other 
Episcopalian  Churches,  the  Presbyterian  and  the 
Methodist,  not  to  mention  hundreds  of  others,  each 
interpret  Christ's  teaching  in  their  own  way. 

Young  men  and  men  of  the  people,  doubting  the 
truth  of  the  Church  teaching  in  which  they  have  been 
brought  up,  often  come  to  me  and  ask  what  my  teach- 
ing is,  and  how  I  understand  Christ's  teaching  ?  Such 
questions  always  grieve  and  even  shock  me. 

Christ,  who  the  Churches  say  was  God,  came  on 
[  189  ] 


190  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

earth  to  reveal  divine  truth  to  men  for  their  guidance 
in  life.  A  man — even  a  plain,  stupid  man — if  he  wants 
to  give  people  guidance  of  importance  to  them,  will 
manage  to  impart  it  so  that  they  can  make  out  what  he 
means.  And  is  it  possible  that  God,  having  come  on 
earth  specially  to  save  people,  was  not  able  to  say  what 
he  wanted  to  say  clearly  enough  to  prevent  people  from 
misinterpreting  his  words,  and  from  disagreeing  with 
each  other  about  them  ? 

This  could  not  be  so  if  Christ  were  God ;  nor  even 
if  Christ  were  not  God,  but  were  merely  a  great 
teacher,  is  it  possible  that  he  failed  to  express  himself 
clearly.  For  a  great  teacher  is  great  just  because  he  is 
able  to  express  the  truth  so  that  it  can  neither  be 
hidden  nor  obscured,  but  is  as  plain  as  daylight. 

In  either  case,  therefore,  the  Gospels  which  transmit 
Christ's  teaching  must  contain  truth.  And,  indeed, 
the  truth  is  there  for  all  who  will  read  the  Gospels 
with  a  sincere  wish  to  know  the  truth,  without  pre- 
judice and,  above  all,  without  supposing  that  they 
contain  some  special  sort  of  wisdom  beyond  human 
reason. 

That  is  how  I  read  the  Gospels,  and  I  found  in  them 
truth  plain  enough  for  little  children  to  understand,  as 
indeed  is  said  in  the  Gospels.  So  that  when  I  am  asked 
what  my  teaching  consists  in,  and  how  I  understand 
Christ's  teaching,  I  reply  :  c  1  have  no  teaching,  but  I 
understand  Christ's  teaching  as  it  is  explained  in  the 
Gospels.  If  I  have  written  books  about  Christ's  teach- 
ing, I  have  done  so  only  to  show  the  falseness  of  inter- 
pretations given  by  commentators  on  the  Gospels.' 

To  understand  Christ's  real  teaching,  the  chief  thing 
is  not  to  interpret  the  Gospels,  but  to  understand  them 
as  they  are  written.  And  therefore,  to  the  question 
how  Christ's  teaching  should  be  understood,  1  reply  : 
'  If  you  wish  to  understand  it,  read  the  Gospels.  Read 
them,  putting  aside  all  foregone  conclusions ;  read 
them  with  the  sole  desire  to  understand  what  is  there 
said.  But  just  because  the  Gospels  are  holy  books, 
read  them  considerately,  reasonably,  and  with  discern- 


HOW  TO  READ  THE  GOSPELS  191 

ment,  and  not  haphazard  or  mechanically,  as  though 
all  the  words  were  of  equal  weight/ 

To  understand  any  book  one  must  choose  out  the 
parts  that  are  quite  clear,  dividing  them  from  what  is 
obscure  or  confused.  And  from  what  is  clear  we 
must  form  our  idea  of  the  drift  and  spirit  of  the 
whole  work.  Then,  on  the  basis  of  what  we  have 
understood,  we  may  proceed  to  make  out  what  is  con- 
fused or  not  quite  intelligible.  That  is  how  we  read 
all  kinds  of  books.  And  it  is  particularly  necessary 
thus  to  read  the  Gospels,  which  have  passed  through  a 
multiplicity  of  compilations,  translations,  and  transcrip- 
tions, and  were  composed  eighteen  centuries  ago,  by 
men  who  were  not  highly  educated,  and  who  were 
superstitious.* 

Therefore,  in  order  to  understand  the  Gospels,  we 
must  first  of  all  separate  what  is  quite  simple  and  in- 
telligible from  what  is  confused  and  unintelligible,  and 
must  afterwards  read  this  clear  and  intelligible  part 
several  times  over,  trying  fully  to  assimilate  it.  Then, 
helped  by  the  comprehension  of  the  general  meaning, 
we  can  try  to  explain  to  ourselves  the  drift  of  the  parts 
which  seemed  involved  and  obscure.  That  was  how  I 
read  the  Gospels,  and  the  meaning  of  Christ's  teaching 
became  so  clear  to  me  that  it  was  impossible  to  have 
any  doubts  about  it.     And  I  advise  everyone  who  wishes 

*  The  Gospels,  as  is  known  to  all  who  have  studied  their 
origin,  far  from  being  infallible  expressions  of  divine  truth, 
are  the  work  of  innumerable  minds  and  hands,  and  are  full 
of  errors.  Therefore  the  Gospels  can  in  no  case  be  taken 
as  a  production  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  Churchmen  assert. 
"Were  that  so,  God  would  have  revealed  the  Gospels  as  He 
is  said  to  have  revealed  the  Commandments  on  Mount 
Sinai  ;  or  He  would  have  transmitted  the  complete  book  to 
men,  as  the  Mormons  declare  was  the  case  with  their  Holy 
Scriptures.  But  we  know  how  these  works  were  written 
and  collected,  and  how  they  were  corrected  and  translated  ; 
and  therefore  not  only  can  we  not  accept  them  as  infallible 
revelations,  but  we  must,  if  we  respect  truth,  correct  errors 
that  we  find  in  them. — L.  T. 


102  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

to  understand  the  true  meaning  of  Christ's  teaching  to 
follow  the  same  plan. 

Let  each  man,  in  reading  the  Gospels,  select  all  that 
seems  to  him  quite  plain,  clear,  and  comprehensible, 
and  let  him  score  it  down  the  margin — say  with  a  blue 
pencil — and  then,  taking  the  marked  passages  first,  let 
him  separate  Christ's  words  from  those  of  the  Evan- 
gelists by  marking  Christ's  words  a  second  time  with, 
say,  a  red  pencil.  Then  let  him  read  over  these  doubly- 
scored  passages  several  times.  Only  after  he  has 
thoroughly  assimilated  these,  let  him  again  read  the 
words  attributed  to  Christ  which  he  did  not  understand 
when  he  first  read  them,  and  let  him  score,  in  red, 
those  which  have  become  plain  to  him.  Let  him  leave 
unscored  the  words  of  Christ  which  remain  quite  unin- 
telligible, and  also  unintelligible  words  by  the  writers 
of  the  Gospels.  The  passages  marked  in  red  will 
supply  the  reader  with  the  essence  of  Christ's  teaching. 
They  will  give  what  all  men  need,  and  what  Christ 
therefore  said  in  a  way  that  all  can  understand.  The 
place^  marked  only  in  blue  will  give  what  the  authors 
of  the  Gospels  said  that  is  intelligible. 

Very  likely  in  selecting  what  is,  from  what  is  not, 
fully  comprehensible,  people  will  not  all  choose  the 
same  passages.  What  is  comprehensible  to  one  may 
seem  obscure  to  another.  But  all  will  certainly  agree 
in  what  is  most  important,  and  these  are  things  which 
will  be  found  quite  intelligible  to  everyone.  It  is  just 
this — just  what  is  fully  comprehensible  to  all  men — 
that  constitutes  the  essence  of  Christ's  teaching. 

[July  22,  o.s.,  1896.] 


XIV 

A  LETTER  TO  RUSSIAN  LIBERALS* 

I  should  be  very  glad  to  join  you  and  your  associates 
— whose  work  I  know  and  appreciate — in  standing  up 
for  the  rights  of  the  Literature  Committee  and  opposing 
the  enemies  of  popular  education.  But  in  the  sphere 
in  which  you  are  working  I  see  no  way  to  resist  them. 

My  only  consolation  is  that  !_,  too,  am  constantly 
engaged  in  struggling  against  the  same  enemies  of 
enlightenment,  though  in  another  manner. 

*  Though  published  as  A  Letter  to  Russian  Liberals,  this 
letter  was,  in  the  first  instance,  addressed  to  a  Russian  lady 
who  wrote  to  Tolstoy  asking  his  advice  or  assistance  when 
the  Literature  Committee  (Komitet  Gramotnosti)  was 
closed.  The  circumstances  were  as  follows  :  A  '  Voluntary 
Economic  Society '  (founded  in  the  reign  of  Catherine  the 
Great)  existed,  and  was  allowed  to  debate  economic  problems 
within  certain  limits.  Its  existence  was  sanctioned  by,  and 
it  was  under  the  control  of,  the  Ministry  of  the  Interior.  A 
branch  of  this  society  was  formed,  called  the  '  Literature 
Committee.'  This  branch  aimed  at  spreading  good  and 
wholesome  literature  among  the  people  and  in  the  schools, 
by  establishing  libraries  or  in  other  ways.  Their  views  as 
to  what  books  it  is  good  for  people  to  read  did  not,  how- 
ever, tally  with  those  of  the  Government,  and  in  1896  it 
was  decreed  that  the  '  Voluntary  Economic  Society  '  should 
be  transferred  from  the  supervision  of  the  Ministry  of  the 
Interior  to  that  of  the  Ministry  of  Education.  This,  trans- 
lated into  unofficial  language,  meant  that  the  activity  of 
the  Committee  was  to  terminate,  and  the  proceedings  of  the 
society  to  be  reduced  to  a  formality. 

[  193  ]  N 


194  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

Concerning  the  special  question  with  which  you  are 
preoccupied,  I  think  that  in  place  of  the  Literature 
Committee  which  has  been  prohibited,  a  number  of 
other  Literature  Associations  to  pursue  the  same  objects 
should  be  formed  without  consulting  the  Government, 
and  without  asking  permission  from  any  censor.  Let 
Government,  if  it  likes,  prosecute  these  Literature 
Associations,  punish  the  members,  banish  them,  etc. 
If  the  Government  does  that,  it  will  merely  cause 
people  to  attach  special  importance  to  good  books  and 
to  libraries,  and  it  will  strengthen  the  trend  towards 
enlightenment. 

It  seems  to  me  that  it  is  now  specially  important 
to  do  what  is  right  quietly  and  persistently,  not  only 
without  asking  permission  from  Government,  but  con- 
sciously avoiding  its  participation.  The  strength  of 
the  Government  lies  in  the  people's  ignorance,  and  the 
Government  knows  this,  and  will  therefore  always 
oppose  true  enlightenment.  It  is  time  we  realized 
that  fact.  And  it  is  most  undesirable  to  let  the 
Government,  while  it  is  spreading  darkness,  pretend 
to  be  busy  with  the  enlightenment  of  the  people.  It  is 
doing  this  now  by  means  of  all  sorts  of  pseudo-educa- 
tional establishments  which  it  controls  :  schools,  high- 
schools,  universities,  academies,  and  all  kinds  of 
committees  and  congresses.  But  good  is  good,  and 
enlightenment  is  enlightenment,  only  when  it  is  quite 
good  and  quite  enlightened,  and  not  when  it  is  toned 
down  to  meet  the  requirements  of  Delyanof  s*  or  Dour- 
novd's  circulars.  And  I  am  extremely  sorry  when  I  see 
valuable,  disinterested,  and  self-sacrificing  efforts  spent 
unprofitably.  It  is  strange  to  see  good,  wise  people 
spending  their  strength  in  a  struggle  against  the  Govern- 
ment, but  carrying  on  that  struggle  on  the  basis  of 
whatever  laws  the  Government  itself  likes  to  make. 

This  is  how  the  matter  appears  to  me  : 

There  are  people  (we  ourselves  are  such)  who  realize 

*  Delyanof  was  Minister  of  Education  and  Dournovo  was 
Minister  of  the  Interior  when  the  Committee  was  sup- 
pressed. 


A  LETTER  TO  RUSSIAN  LIBERALS        195 

that  our  Government  is  very  bad,  and  who  struggle 
against  it.  From  before  the  days  of  Radistchef*  and 
the  Decembrists  there  have  been  two  ways  of  carrying 
on  the  struggle.  One  way  is  that  of  Stenka  Razin,t 
Pougatchef,!  the  Decembrists,  the  Revolutionary  party 
of  the  'sixties,  §  the  Terrorists  of  March  1,||  and  others. 
The  other  way  is  that  which  is  preached  and  practised 
by  you,  the  method  of  the c  Gradualists/  which  consists  in 
carrying  on  the  struggle  without  violence  and  within 
the  limits  of  the  law,  conquering  constitutional  rights 
bit  by  bit. 

Within  my  memory  both  these  methods  have  been 
employed  unremittingly  for  more  than  half  a  century, 

*  Radistchef,  the  author  of  A  Journey  from  Petersburg  to 
Moscow,  was  a  Liberal  whose  efforts  towards  the  abolition  of 
serfdom  led  to  his  being  banished  to  Siberia.  Recalled  to 
Petersburg  after  five  years,  he  recommenced  his  activity  as  a 
reformer,  was  reproved  and  threatened  by  the  Government, 
became  hypochondriac,  and  committed  suicide  in  1802/ 

As  to  the  Decembrists,  see  footnote  on  p.  160. 

f  Stenka  Razin  was  a  Cossack  who  raised  a  formidable 
insurrection  in  the  seventeenth  century.  He  was  eventually 
defeated  and  captured,  and  was  executed  in  Moscow  in 
1671. 

X  Pougatchef  headed  the  most  formidable  Russian  insur- 
rection of  the  eighteenth  century.  He  was  executed  in 
Moscow  in  1775. 

§  The  series  of  reforms,  including  the  abolition  of  serf- 
dom, which  followed  the  Crimean  War  and  the  death  of 
Nicholas  I.,  were,  from  the  first,  adopted  half-heartedly, 
and  since  the  time  of  the  Polish  insurrection  (1863)  the 
control  of  the  Government  has  been  in  reactionary  hands. 
The  more  vehement  members  of  the  Liberal  party,  losing 
hope  of  constitutional  reform,  formed  a  Revolutionary  party 
in  the  'sixties,  and  later  on  the  Terrorist  party  was  started, 
which  organized  assassinations  as  a  means  towards  liberty, 
equality,  and  fraternity. 

||  Alexander  II.  was  killed  by  a  bomb  thrown  at  him  in 
the  streets  of  Petersburg  on  March  1,  o.s.  (March  13,  n.s.), 
1881.  This  assassination  was  organized  by  the  Terrorist 
party. 

n  2 


196  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

and  yet  the  state  of  things  grows  worse  and  worse. 
Even  such  signs  of  improvement  as  do  show  themselves 
have  come,  not  from  either  of  these  kinds  of  activity, 
but  from  causes  of  which  I  will  speak  later  on,  and  in 
spite  of  the  harm  done  by  these  two  kinds  of  activity. 
Meanwhile,  the  power  against  which  we  struggle  grows 
ever  greater,  stronger,  and  more  insolent.  The  last 
gleams  of  self-government — Local  Government,  public 
trial,  your  Literature  Committee,  etc.,  etc. — are  all 
being  done  away  with. 

Now  that  both  methods  have  been  tried  without  effect 
for  so  long  a  time,  we  may,  it  seems  to  me,  see  clearly 
that  neither  the  one  nor  the  other  will  do,  and  see  also 
why  this  is  so.  To  me,  at  least,  who  have  always  dis- 
liked our  Government,  but  have  never  adopted  either  of 
the  above  methods  of  resisting  it,  the  defects  of  both 
methods  are  apparent. 

The  first  method  is  unsatisfactory,  because  even  could 
an  attempt  to  alter  the  existing  regime  by  violent  means 
succeed,  there  would  be  no  guarantee  that  the  new 
organization  would  be  durable,  and  that  the  enemies  of 
that  new  order  would  not,  at  some  convenient  oppor- 
tunity, triumph  by  using  violence  such  as  had  been 
used  against  them,  as  has  happened  over  and  over  again 
in  France  and  wherever  else  there  have  been  revolu- 
tions. And  so  the  new  order  of  things,  established  by 
violence,  would  have  continually  to  be  supported  by 
violence — i.e.,  by  wrong-doing.  And,  consequently, 
it  would  inevitably,  and  very  quickly,  be  vitiated, 
like  the  order  it  replaced.  And  in  case  of  failure  the 
violence  of  the  Revolutionists  only  strengthens  the 
order  of  things  they  strive  against  (as  has  always  been 
the  case,  in  our  Russian  experience,  from  PougatcheT s 
rebellion  to  the  attempt  of  March  1),  for  it  drives  the 
whole  crowd  of  undecided  people — who  stand  wavering 
between  the  two  parties — into  the  camp  of  the  conserva- 
tive and  retrograde  party.  So  I  think  that,  guided 
both  by  reason  and  experience,  we  may  boldly  say  that 
this  means,  besides  being  immoral,  is  irrational  and 
ineffectual. 


A  LETTER  TO  RUSSIAN  LIBERALS       197 

The  other  method  is,  in  my  opinion,  even  less  effec- 
tual or  rational.  It  is  ineffectual  and  irrational  because 
Government — holding  in  its  grasp  the  whole  power  (the 
army,  the  administration,  the  Church,  the  schools,  and 
the  police),  and  framing  what  are  called  the  laws  on 
the  basis  of  which  the  Liberals  wish  to  resist  it — this 
Government  knows  very  well  what  is  really  dangerous 
to  it,  and  will  never  let  people  who  submit  to  it  and  act 
under  its  guidance  do  anything  that  will  undermine  its 
authority.  For  instance,  take  the  case  before  us  :  a 
Government  such  as  ours,  or  any  other  which  rests  on 
the  ignorance  of  the  people,  will  never  consent  to  their 
being  really  enlightened.  It  will  sanction  all  kinds  of 
pseudo-educational  organizations  controlled  by  itself — 
schools,  high  schools,  universities,  academies,  and  all 
kinds  of  committees  and  congresses  and  publications 
sanctioned  by  the  censor — so  long  as  these  organiza- 
tions and  publications  serve  its  purpose — that  is,  stupefy 
the  people,  or  at  least  do  not  hinder  their  stupefaction. 
But  as  soon  as  those  organizations  or  publications 
attempt  to  cure  that  on  which  the  power  of  Govern- 
ment rests  (namely,  the  blindness  of  the  people),  the 
Government  will  simply,  and  without  rendering  any 
account  to  anyone,  or  saying  why  it  acts  so  and  not 
otherwise,  pronounce  its  veto,  and  will  rearrange  or 
close  the  establishments  and  organizations,  and  forbid 
the  publications.  And  therefore,  as  both  reason  and 
experience  clearly  show,  such  an  illusory,  gradual  con- 
quest of  rights  is  a  self-deception  which  suits  the 
Government  admirably,  and  which  it,  therefore,  is 
even  ready  to  encourage. 

But  not  only  is  this  activity  irrational  and  ineffectual, 
it  is  also  harmful.  It  is  harmful  because  enlightened, 
good,  and  honest  people  by  entering  the  ranks  of  the 
Government  give  it  a  moral  authority  which  but  for 
them  it  would  not  possess.  If  the  Government  were 
made  up  entirely  of  that  coarse  element — the  men  of 
violence,  self-seekers,  and  flatterers — who  form  its  core, 
it  could  not  continue  to  exist.  The  fact  that  honest 
and  enlightened  people  are  found  participating  in  the 


198  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

affairs  of  the  Government  gives  Government  whatever 
moral  prestige  it  possesses. 

That  is  one  evil  resulting  from  the  activity  of  Liberals 
who  participate  in  the  affairs  of  Government,  or  who 
come  to  terms  with  it.  Another  evil  of  such  activity  is 
that  to  secure  opportunities  to  carry  on  their  work, 
these  highly-enlightened  and  honest  people  have  to 
begin  to  compromise,  and  so,  little  by  little,  come  to 
consider  that  for  a  good  end  one  may  swerve  somewhat 
from  truth  in  word  and  deed.  For  instance,  that  one 
may,  though  not  believing  in  the  established  Church, 
take  part  in  its  ceremonies ;  may  take  oaths  ;  may, 
when  necessary  for  the  success  of  some  affair,  present 
petitions  couched  in  language  which  is  untruthful  and 
derogatory  to  man's  natural  dignity  ;  may  enter  the 
army  ;  may  take  part  in  a  Local  Government  which  has 
been  stripped  of  all  its  powers  ;  may  serve  as  a  master  or 
a  professor,  teaching  not  what  one  considers  necessary 
one's  self,  but  what  one  is  told  to  teach  by  the  Govern- 
ment ;  that  one  may  even  become  a  Zemsky  Natchdlnik* 
submitting  to  Governmental  demands  and  instructions 
which  violate  one's  conscience  ;  may  edit  newspapers 
and  periodicals,  remaining  silent  about  what  ought  to 
be  mentioned,  and  printing  what  one  is  ordered  to  print : 
and  entering  into  these  compromises — the  limits  of 
which  cannot  be  foreseen — enlightened  and  honest 
people,  who  alone  could  form  some  barrier  to  the 
infringements  of  human  liberty  by  the  Government, 

*  During  the  Reform  period,  in  the  reign  of  Alexander  II., 
many  iniquities  of  the  old  judicial  system  were  abolished. 
Among  other  innovations  '  Judges  of  the  Peace '  were 
appointed  to  act  as  magistrates.  They  were  elected  (indi- 
rectly) ;  if  possessed  of  a  certain  property  qualification, 
men  of  any  class  were  eligible,  and  the  regulations  under 
which  they  acted  were  drawn  up  in  a  comparatively  liberal 
spirit.  Under  Alexander  III.  the  office  of  *  Judge  of  the 
Peace'  was  abolished,  and  was  replaced  by  Z&msky  Na- 
tchdlniks.  Only  members  of  the  aristocracy  were  eligible  ; 
they  were  not  elected,  but  appointed  by  Government,  and 
they  were  armed  with  authority  to  have  peasants  flogged. 


A  LETTER  TO  RUSSIAN  LIBERALS       190 

retreating,  little  by  little,  further  and  further  from 
the  demands  of  conscience,  fall  at  last  into  a  position 
of  complete  dependency  on  the  Government.  They 
receive  rewards  and  salaries  from  it,  and,  continuing  to 
imagine  that  they  are  forwarding  Liberal  ideas,  become 
the  humble  servants  and  supporters  of  the  very  order 
against  which  they  set  out  to  fight. 

It  is  true  that  there  are  also  better,  sincere  people 
in  the  Liberal  camp,  whom  the  Government  cannot 
bribe,  and  who  remain  unbought  and  free  from  salaries 
and  position.  But  even  these  people,  having  been  en- 
snared in  the  nets  spread  by  Government,  beat  their 
wings  in  their  cages  (as  you  are  now  doing  in  your 
Committee),  unable  to  advance  from  the  spot  they 
are  on.  Or  else,  becoming  enraged,  they  go  over  to 
the  revolutionary  camp  ;  or  they  shoot  themselves  ;  or 
take  to  drink  ;  or  they  abandon  the  whole  struggle 
in  despair,  and,  oftenest  of  all,  retire  into  literary 
activity,  in  which,  yielding  to  the  demands  of  the 
censor,  they  say  only  what  they  are  allowed  to  say,  and 
by  that  very  silence  about  what  is  most  important 
convey  to  the  public  distorted  views,  which  just  suit  the 
Government.  But  they  continue  to  imagine  that  they 
are  serving  society  by  the  writings  which  give  them 
means  of  subsistence. 

Thus,  reflection  and  experience  alike  show  me  that 
both  the  means  of  combating  Government  used  hereto- 
fore, are  not  only  ineffectual,  but  actually  tend  to 
strengthen  the  power  and  irresponsibility  of  the 
Government. 

What  is  to  be  done  ?  Evidently  not  what  for  seventy 
years  past  has  proved  fruitless,  and  has  only  produced 
reverse  results.  What  is  to  be  done  ?  Just  what  those 
have  done,  to  whose  activity  we  owe  the  progress 
towards  light  and  good  that  has  been  achieved  since 
the  world  began,  and  that  is  still  being  achieved  to-day. 
That  is  what  must  be  done  !     And  what  is  it  ? 

Merely  the  simple,  quiet,  truthful  carrying  on  of 
what  you  consider  good  and  needful,  quite  inde- 
pendently of  the  Government,  or  of  whether  it  likes  it 


200  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

or  not.  In  other  words  :  standing  up  for  one's  rights, 
not  as  a  member  of  the  ( Literature  Committee/  nor  as 
a  deputy,  nor  as  a  land-owner,  nor  as  a  merchant,  nor 
even  as  a  Member  of  Parliament ;  but  standing  up  for 
one's  rights  as  a  rational  and  free  man,  and  defending 
them — not  as  the  rights  of  Local  Boards  or  Committees 
are  defended,  with  concessions  and  compromises, 
but  without  any  concessions  or  compromises — in  the 
only  way  in  which  moral  and  human  dignity  can  be 
defended. 

Successfully  to  defend  a  fortress,  one  has  to  burn  all 
the  houses  in  the  suburbs  and  leave  only  what  is  strong, 
and  what  you  intend  not  to  surrender  on  any  account. 
Only  from  the  basis  of  this  firm  stronghold  can  we 
conquer  all  we  require.  True,  the  rights  of  a  Member 
of  Parliament,  or  even  of  a  member  of  a  Local  Board, 
are  greater  than  the  rights  of  an  ordinary  man  ;  and  it 
seems  as  though  we  could  do  much  by  using  those 
rights.  But  the  hitch  is  that  to  obtain  the  rights  of  a 
Member  of  Parliament,  or  of  a  committee-man,  one 
has  to  abandon  part  of  one's  rights  as  a  man.  And 
having  abandoned  part  of  one's  rights  as  a  man,  there 
is  no  longer  any  fixed  point  of  leverage,  and  one  can 
no  longer  either  conquer  or  maintain  any  real  right. 
In  order  to  lift  others  out  of  a  quagmire  one  must  one's 
self  stand  on  firm  ground  ;  and  if,  hoping  the  better  to 
assist  others,  you  go  into  the  quagmire,  you  will  not 
pull  others  out,  but  will  yourself  sink  in. 

It  may  be  very  desirable  and  useful  to  get  an  eight- 
hours'  day  legalized  by  Parliament,  or  to  get  a  Liberal 
programme  for  school  libraries  sanctioned  through 
your  Committee  ;  but  if  as  a  means  to  this  end  a 
Member  of  Parliament  must  publicly  lift  up  his  hand 
and  lie,  lie  when  taking  an  oath,  by  expressing  in 
words  respect  for  what  he  does  not  respect ;  or  (in  our 
own  case)  if,  in  order  to  pass  programmes  however 
Liberal,  it  is  necessary  to  take  part  in  public  worship, 
to  be  sworn,  to  wear  a  uniform,  to  write  mendacious 
and  flattering  petitions,  and  to  make  speeches  of  a 
similar  character,  etc.,  etc. — then,  by  doiny  these  things 


A  LETTER  TO  RUSSIAN  LIBERALS       201 

and  foregoing  our  dignity  as  men,  we  lose  much  more 
than  we  gain,  and  by  trying  to  reach  one  definite  aim 
(which  very  often  is  not  reached)  we  deprive  ourselves 
of  the  possibility  of  reaching  other  aims  which  are  of 
supreme  importance.  Only  people  who  have  something 
which  they  will  on  no  account  and  under  no  circum- 
stances yield  can  resist  a  Government  and  curb  it. 
To  have  power  to  resist,  you  must  stand  on  firm 
ground. 

And  the  Government  knows  this  very  well,  and  is, 
above  all  else,  concerned  to  worm  out  of  men  that 
which  will  not  yield — namely,  their  dignity  as  men. 
When  that  is  wormed  out  of  them,  the  Government 
calmly  proceeds  to  do  what  it  likes,  knowing  that  it 
will  no  longer  meet  any  real  resistance.  A  man  who 
consents  publicly  to  swear,  pronouncing  the  degrading 
and  mendacious  words  of  the  oath  ;  or  submissively  to 
wait  several  hours,  dressed  up  in  a  uniform,  at  a 
Minister's  reception  ;  or  to  inscribe  himself  as  a  Special 
Constable  for  the  Coronation  ;  or  to  fast  and  receive 
Communion  for  respectability's  sake  ;  or  to  ask  the 
Head-Censor  whether  he  may,  or  may  not,  express 
such  and  such  thoughts,  etc. — such  a  man  is  no  longer 
feared  by  Government. 

Alexander  II.  said  he  did  not  fear  the  Liberals, 
because  he  knew  they  could  all  be  bought — if  not  with 
money,  then  with  honours. 

People  who  take  part  in  Government,  or  work  under 
its  direction,  may  deceive  themselves  or  their  sympa- 
thizers by  making  a  show  of  struggling  ;  but  those 
against  whom. they  struggle  (the  Government)  know 
quite  well,  by  the  strength  of  the  resistance  experi- 
enced, that  these  people  are  not  really  pulling,  but  are 
only  pretending  to.  Our  Government  knows  this  with 
respect  to  the  Liberals,  and  constantly  tests  the  quality 
of  the  opposition,  and  finding  that  genuine  resistance 
is  practically  non-existent,  it  continues  its  course  in 
full  assurance  that  it  can  do  what  it  likes  with  such 
opponents. 

The  Government  of  Alexander  III.  knew  this  very 


202  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

well,  and,  knowing  it,  deliberately  destroyed  all  that 
the  Liberals  thought  they  had  achieved,  and  were  so 
proud  of.  It  altered  and  limited  Trial  by  Jury  ;  it 
abolished  the  office  of  Judge  of  the  Peace  ;  it  cancelled 
the  rights  of  the  Universities ;  it  perverted  the  whole 
system  of  instruction  in  the  High  Schools  ;  it  re-estab- 
lished the  Cadet  Corps,  and  even  the  State-sale  of 
intoxicants ;  it  established  the  Zemsky  Natchdlniks ;  it 
legalized  flogging  ;  it  almost  abolished  the  Local 
Government  ;  it  gave  uncontrolled  power  to  the 
Governors  of  Provinces  ;  it  encouraged  the  quartering 
of  troops  on  the  peasants  in  punishment ;  it  increased 
the  practice  of  '  administrative  **  banishment  and  im- 
prisonment, and  the  capital  punishment  of  political 
offenders  ;  it  renewed  religious  persecutions  ;  it  brought 
to  a  climax  the  use  of  barbarous  superstitions  ;  it 
legalized  murder  in  duels  ;  under  the  name  of  a  '  State 
of  Siege  *t  it  established  lawlessness  with  capital 
punishment  as  a  normal  condition  of  things — and  in 
all  this  it  met  with  no  protest  except  from  one  honour- 
able woman,J  who  boldly  told  the  Government  the 
truth'  as  she  saw  it. 

The  Liberals  whispered  among  themselves  that  these 
things  displeased  them,  but  they  continued  to  take  part 

*  Sentenced  by  Administrative  Order  means  sentenced 
by  the  arbitrary  will  of  the  Government,  or  by  the  Chief  of 
the  Gendarmes  of  a  Province.  Administrative  sentences 
are  often  inflicted  without  the  victim  being  heard  in  his 
own  defence,  or  even  knowing  what  he  is  punished  for. 

t  The  '  Statute  of  Increased  Protection,'  usually  trans- 
lated 'State  of  Siege,'  was  first  applied  to  Petersburg  and 
Moscow  only,  but  was  subsequently  extended  to  Odessa, 
Kief,  Kharkof,  and  Warsaw.  Under\  this  law,  practically 
absolute  power,  including  that  of  capital  punishment,  was 
entrusted  to  the  Governors -General  of  the  Provinces  in 
question. 

%  Madame  Tsebrikof,  a  well-known  writer  and  literary 
critic,  wrote  a  polite  but  honest  letter  to  Alexander  III., 
pointing  out  what  was  being  done  by  the  Government. 
She  was  banished  to  a  distant  province. 


A  LETTER  TO  RUSSIAN  LIBERALS       203 

in  legal  proceedings,  and  in  the  Local  Governments, 
and  in  the  Universities,  and  in  Government  service,  and 
on  the  Press.  In  the  Press  they  hinted  at  what  they 
were  allowed  to  hint  at,  and  kept  silence  on  matters 
they  had  to  be  silent  about,  but  they  printed  whatever 
they  were  told  to  print.  So  that  every  reader  (not 
privy  to  the  whisperings  of  the  editorial  rooms),  on  re- 
ceiving a  Liberal  paper  or  magazine,  read  the  announce- 
ment of  the  most  cruel  and  irrational  measures  unaccom- 
panied by  comment  or  sign  of  disapproval,  together 
with  sycophantic  and  flattering  addresses  to  those  guilty 
of  enacting  these  measures,  and  frequently  even  praise 
of  the  measures  themselves.  Thus  all  the  dismal 
activity  of  the  Government  of  Alexander  III. — destroy- 
ing whatever  good  had  begun  to  take  root  in  the 
days  of  Alexander  II.,  and  striving  to  turn  Russia 
back  to  the  barbarity  of  the  commencement  of  this 
century — all  this  dismal  activity  of  gallows,  rods, 
persecutions,  and  stupefaction  of  the  people,  has 
become  (even  in  the  Liberal  papers  and  magazines) 
the  basis  of  an  insane  laudation  of  Alexander  III.  and 
of  his  acclamation  as  a  great  man  and  a  model  of 
human  dignity. 

This  same  thing  is  being  continued  in  the  new  reign. 
The  young  man  who  succeeded  the  late  Tsar,  having  no 
understanding  of  life,  was  assured  by  the  men  in  power, 
to  whom  it  was  profitable  to  say  so,  that  the  best  way 
to  rule  a  hundred  million  people  is  to  do  as  his  father 
did — that  is,  not  to  ask  advice  from  anyone,  but  to  do 
just  what  comes  into  his  head,  or  what  the  first  flatterer 
about  him  advises.  And,  fancying  that  unlimited  auto- 
cracy is  a  sacred  life-principle  of  the  Russian  people, 
the  young  man  begins  to  reign  ;  and  instead  of  asking 
the  representatives  of  the  Russian  people  to  help  him 
with  their  advice  in  the  task  of  ruling  (about  which  he, 
educated  in  a  cavalry  regiment,  knows  nothing  and  can 
know  nothing),  he  rudely  and  insolently  shouts  at 
those  representatives  of  the  Russian  people  who  visit 
him  with  congratulations,   and  he   calls   the  desire, 


204  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

timidly  expressed  by  some  of  them,*  to  be  allowed 
to  inform  the  authorities  of  their  needs,  'insensate 
dreams.' 

And  what  followed  ?  Was  Russian  society  shocked  ? 
Did  enlightened  and  honest  people — the  Liberals — 
express  their  indignation  and  repulsion  ?  Did  they  at 
least  refrain  from  laudation  of  this  Government,  and 
from  participating  in  it  and  encouraging  it  ?  Not  at  all. 
From  that  time  a  specially  intense  competition  in 
adulation  commenced,  both  of  the  father  and  of  the 
son  who  imitated  him.  And  not  a  protesting  voice  was 
heard,  except  in  one  anonymous  letter,  cautiously 
expressing  disapproval  of  the  young  Tsar's  conduct. 
From  all  sides  fulsome  and  flattering  addresses  were 
brought  to  the  Tsar,  as  well  as  (for  some  reason  or 
other)  iconsf  which  nobody  wanted  and  which  serve 
merely  as  objects  of  idolatry  to  benighted  people.  An 
insane  expenditure  of  money :  a  Coronation  amazing  in 
its  absurdity,  was  arranged  ;  the  arrogance  of  the  rulers 
and  their  contempt  of  the  people  caused  thousands  to 
perish  in  a  fearful  calamity — which  was  regarded  as  a 
slight  eclipse  of  the  festivities,  which  did  not  termi- 
nate on  that  account.  |  An  exhibition  §  was  organized, 
which  no  one  wanted  except  those  who  organized  it, 
and  which  cost  millions  of  roubles.  In  the  Chancellery 
of  the  Holy  Synod,  with  unparalleled  effrontery,  a  new 

*  By  the  representatives  of  the  Local  Government  of 
Tver  and  others,  at  a  reception  in  the  Winter  Palace  on  the 
accession  of  Nicholas  II. 

f  Ic6ns  are  conventional  paintings  of  God,  Jesus,  angels, 
saints,  the  'Mother  of  God,'  etc.,  usually  ;done  on  bits  of 
wood,  with  much  gilding.  They  are  hung  up  in  the  corners 
of  the  rooms,  as  well  as  in  churches,  etc.,  to  be  prayed  to. 

t  As  part  of  the  Coronation  festivities,  a  '  People's  Fete' 
was  arranged  to  take  place  on  the  Hodinskoe  Field,  near 
Moscow.  Owing  to  bad  arrangements,  some  3,000  people 
were  killed  when  trying  to  enter  the  grounds,  and  many 
others  were  injured.  This  occurred  on  Saturday,  May  IS, 
o.s.,  1896.  That  same  evening  the  Emperor  danced  at  the 
grand  ball  given  by  the  French  Ambassador  in  Moscow. 

§  The  unsuccessful  Exhibition  at  Nizhni  Novgorod  in  1896. 


A  LETTER  TO  RUSSIAN  LIBERALS       205 

and  supremely  stupid  means  of  mystifying  people  was 
devised — namely,  the  enshrinement  of  the  incorruptible 
body  of  a  Saint  whom  nobody  knew  anything"  about.* 
The  stringency  of  the  Censor  was  increased.  Religious 
persecution  was  made  more  severe.  The  State  of  Siege 
(i.e.,  the  legalization  of  lawlessness)  was  continued, 
and  the  state  of  things  is  still  becoming  worse  and 
worse. 

And  I  think  that  all  this  would  not  have  happened  if 
those  enlightened,  honest  people  who  are  now  occupied 
in  Liberal  activity  on  the  basis  of  legality,  in  Local 
Governments,  in  the  Committees,  in  Censor-ruled 
literature,  etc.,  had  not  devoted  their  energies  to  the 
task  of  circumventing  the  Government  and — without 
abandoning  the  forms  it  has  itself  arranged — of  finding 
ways  to  make  it  act  so  as  to  harm  and  injure  itself  :t 
but,  abstaining  from  taking  any  part  in  Government 
or  in  any  business  bound  up  with  Government,  had 
merely  claimed  their  rights  as  men. 

*  You  wish,  instead  of  Judges  of  the  Peace,  to  insti- 
tute Zemsky  Natchdlniks  with  birch-rods  :  that  is  your 
business,  but  we  will  not  go  to  law  before  your  Zemsky 
Natchdlniks,  and  will  not  ourselves  accept  appointment 
to  such  an  office.  You  wish  to  make  trial  by  jury  a 
mere  formality  :  that  is  your  business,  but  we  will  not 
serve  as  judges,  or  as  advocates,  or  as  jurymen.  You 
wish,  under  the  name  of  a  "  State  of  Siege,"  to  establish 
despotism  :  that  is  your  business,  but  we  will  not  partici- 
pate in  it,  and  will  plainly  call  the  "  State  of  Siege  " 

*  The  '  incorruptible '  body  of  St.  Theodosius  was  exhi- 
bited to  the  people  and  to  the  pilgrims  who  assembled 
from  all  parts  of  Russia,  and  was  then  enshrined  with  great 
pomp  in  the  Cathedral  of  Tchernigof  in  1896.  These  relics 
performed  miracles,  which  were  fully  reported  in  the  official 
papers,  and  no  papers  ventured  to  express  any  doubts  as  to 
the  genuine  nature  of  these  occurrences. 

+  Sometimes  it  seems  to  me  simply  laughable  that  people 
can  occupy  themselves  with  such  an  evidently  hopeless 
business  ;  it  is  like  undertaking  to  cut  off  an  animal's  leg 
without  letting  it  notice  it. — L.  T. 


206  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

despotism,  and  capital  punishment  inflicted  without 
trial— murder.  You  wish  to  organize  Cadet  Corps,  or 
Classical  High  Schools  in  which  military  exercises  and 
the  Orthodox  Faith  are  taught :  that  is  your  affair,  but 
we  will  not  teach  in  such  schools,  nor  send  our  children 
to  them,  but  will  educate  our  children  as  seems  to  us 
right.  You  decide  to  reduce  the  Local  Governments 
to  impotence  :  we  will  not  take  part  in  them.  You 
prohibit  the  publication  of  literature  that  displeases 
you  :  you  may  seize  books  and  punish  the  printers,  but 
you  cannot  prevent  our  speaking  and  writing,  and  we 
shall  continue  to  do  so.  You  demand  an  oath  of 
allegiance  to  the  Tsar  :  we  will  not  accede  to  what  is 
so  stupid,  false,  and  degrading.  You  order  us  to  serve 
in  the  army  :  we  will  not  do  so,  because  wholesale 
murder  is  as  opposed  to  our  conscience  as  individual 
murder,  and,  above  all,  because  to  promise  to  murder 
whomsoever  a  commander  may  tell  us  to  murder  is  the 
meanest  act  a  man  can  commit.  You  profess  a  religion 
which  is  a  thousand  years  behind  the  times,  with  an 
"  Iberian  Mother  of  God  ''*  relics,  and  coronations :  that 
is  your  affair,  but  we  do  not  acknowledge  idolatry  and 
superstition  to  be  religion,  but  call  them  idolatry  and 
superstition,  and  we  try  to  free  people  from  them.' 

And  what  can  the  Government  do  against  such 
activity  ?  It  can  banish  or  imprison  a  man  for  prepar- 
ing a  bomb,  or  even  for  printing  a  proclamation  to 
working  men  ;  it  can  transfer  your  Literature  Com- 
mittee from  one  Ministry  to  another,  or  close  a  Parlia- 
ment ;  but  what  can  a  Government  do  with  a  man  who 
is  not  willing  publicly  to  lie  with  uplifted  hand,  or  who 
is  not  willing  to  send  his  children  to  an  establishment 
which  he  considers  bad,  or  who  is  not  willing  to  learn 
to  kill  people,  or  is  not  willing  to  take  part  in  idolatr)', 
or  is  not  willing  to  take  part  in  coronations,  deputa- 

*  '  The  Iberian  Mother  of  God '  in  Moscow  is  a  wonder- 
working icon  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  which  draws  a  large 
revenue.  It  is  frequently  taken  to  visit  the  sick,  and 
travels  about  with  six  horses  ;  the  attendant  priest  sits  in 
the  carriage  bareheaded. 


A  LETTER  TO  RUSSIAN  LIBERALS       207 

tions  and  addresses,  or  who  says  and  writes  what  he 
thinks  and  feels  ?  By  prosecuting  such  a  man  the 
Government  secures  for  him  general  sympathy,  making 
him  a  martyr,  and  it  undermines  the  foundations  on 
which  it  is  itself  built,  for,  in  so  acting,  instead  of 
protecting  human  rights  it  itself  infringes  them. 

And  it  is  only  necessary  for  all  those  good,  enlight- 
ened, and  honest  people  whose  strength  is  now  wasted 
in  Revolutionary,  Socialistic,  or  Liberal  activity  (harm- 
ful to  themselves  and  to  their  cause)  to  begin  to  act 
thus,  and  a  nucleus  of  honest,  enlightened,  and  moral 
people  would  form  around  them,  united  in  the  same 
thoughts  and  the  same  feelings.  And  to  this  nucleus 
the  ever-wavering  crowd  of  average  people  would  at 
once  gravitate,  and  public  opinion — the  only  power 
which  subdues  Governments — would  become  evident, 
demanding  freedom  of  speech,  freedom  of  conscience, 
justice  and  humanity.  And  as  soon  as  public  opinion 
was  formulated,  not  only  would  it  be  impossible  to 
suppress  the  Literature  Committee,  but  all  those  in- 
human organizations — the  ( State  of  Siege,'  the  Secret 
Police,  the  Censor,  Schliisselburg,*  the  Holy  Synod, 
and  the  rest — against  which  the  Revolutionists  and 
the  Liberals  are  now  struggling,  would  disappear  of 
themselves. 

So  that  two  methods  of  opposing  the  Government 
have  been  tried,  both  unsuccessfully,  and  it  now 
remains  to  try  a  third  and  last  method,  one  not  yet 
tried,  but  one  which,  I  think,  cannot  but  be  successful. 
Briefly,  it  is  this  :  That  all  enlightened  and  honest 
people  should  try  to  be  as  good  as  they  can ;  and  not 
even  good  in  all  respects  but  only  in  one,  namely,  in 
observing  one  of  the  most  elementary  virtues — to  be 
honest  and  not  to  lie,  but  so  to  act  and  speak  that  your 
motives  should  be  intelligible  to  an  affectionate  seven- 
year-old  boy  ;  to  act  so  that  your  boy  should  not  say  : 
( But  why,  papa,  did  you  say  so-and-so,  and  now  you 
do  and  say  something  quite  different  ?'     This  method 

*  The  most  terrible  of  the  places  of  imprisonment  in 
Petersburg. 


208  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

seems  very  weak,  and  yet  I  am  convinced  that  it  is 
this  method,  and  this  method  alone,  that  has  moved 
humanity  since  the  race  began.  Only  because  there 
were  straight  men — truthful  and  courageous,  who  made 
no  concessions  that  infringed  their  dignity  as  men — 
have  all  those  beneficent  revolutions  been  accomplished 
of  which  mankind  now  has  the  advantage — from  the 
abolition  of  torture  and  slavery  up  to  liberty  of  speech 
and  of  conscience.  Nor  can  this  be  otherwise,  for 
what  is  demanded  by  conscience  (the  highest  fore- 
feeling  man  possesses  of  the  truth  to  which  he  can 
attain)  is  always  and  in  all  respects  the  thing  most 
fruitful  and  most  necessary  for  humanity  at  the  given 
time.  Only  a  man  who  lives  according  to  his  con- 
science can  exert  influence  on  people,  and  only  activity 
that  accords  with  one's  conscience  can  be  useful. 

But  I  must  make  my  meaning  quite  plain.  To  say 
that  the  most  effectual  means  of  achieving  the  ends 
towards  which  Revolutionists  and  Liberals  are  striving 
is  by  activity  in  accord  with  their  consciences,  does 
not  mean  that  people  can  begin  to  live  conscientiously 
in  order  to  achieve  those  ends.  To  begin  to  live 
conscientiously  on  purpose  to  achieve  external  ends  is 
impossible. 

To  live  according  to  one's  conscience  is  possible  only 
as  a  result  of  firm  and  clear  religious  convictions  ;  the 
beneficent  result  of  these  on  our  external  life  will 
inevitably  follow.  Therefore  the  gist  of  what  I  wished 
to  say  to  you  is  this  :  That  it  is  unprofitable  for  good, 
sincere  people  to  spend  their  powers  of  mind  and  soul 
on  gaining  small  practical  ends — for  instance,  in  the 
various  struggles  of  nationalities,  or  parties,  or  in 
Liberal  wire-pulling — while  they  have  not  reached  a 
clear  and  firm  religious  perception,  that  is,  a  conscious- 
ness of  the  meaning  and  purpose  of  life.  I  think  that 
all  the  powers  of  soul  and  mind  of  good  men,  who 
wish  to  be  of  service  to  humanity,  should  be  directed 
to  that  end.  When  that  is  accomplished  all  else  will 
also  be  accomplished. 

Forgive  me  for  sending  you  so  long  a  letter,  which 


A  LETTER  TO  RUSSIAN  LIBERALS      209 

perhaps  you  did  not  at  all  need,  but  I  have  long  wished 
to  express  my  views  on  this  question.  I  even  began  a 
long  article  about  it,  but  I  shall  hardly  have  time  to 
finish  it  before  death  comes,  and  therefore  I  wished  to 
get  at  least  part  of  it  said.  Forgive  me  if  I  am  in  error 
about  anything. 

[August  31,  o.s.,  1896.] 


XV 

TIMOTHY  BONDAREF 

How  strange  and  odd  it  would  have  seemed  to  the 
educated  Romans  of  the  middle  of  the  first  century,  had 
anyone  told  them  that  the  obscure,  confused,  and  often 
unintelligible  letters  addressed  by  a  wandering  Jew 
to  his  friends  and  pupils  would  have  a  hundred,  a 
thousand,  a  hundred  thousand  times  more  readers,  more 
circulation,  and  more  influence  over  people,  than  all 
the  poems,  odes,  elegies,  and  elegant  epistles  of  the 
authors  of  that  age !  And  yet  that  is  what  has 
happened. 

Equally  strange  and  odd  must  my  assertion  seem  to 
people  to-day,  that  Bdndaref 's  work — at  the  naivete 
of  which  we  condescendingly  smile  from  the  height  of 
our  mental  grandeur — will  survive  all  the  other  works 
described  in  this  Dictionary,  and  have  more  effect  on 
people  than  all  the  other  books  mentioned  in  it  put  to- 
gether. And  yet  I  am  convinced  that  such  will  be  the 
case.  And  the  reason  of  my  conviction  is,  that  just  as 
there  are  an  innumerable  quantity  of  false  paths  that 
lead  nowhere  and  are  therefore  unnecessary,  but  only 
one  true  path  that  leads  us  to  our  aim  and  is  therefore 
necessary,  so  also  there  are  an  innumerable  quantity 
of  false,  unnecessary  thoughts,  but  only  one  true  and 
needful  thought,  or,  rather,  direction  of  thought ;  and 
that  true  and  needful  direction  of  thought  in  our  time 
has  been  expressed  by  Bondaref  in  his  book,  with  a 
force,  clearness  and  conviction  with  which  no  one  else 
has  expressed  it.  Therefore,  the  many  works  that  now 
seem  so  important  and  necessary  may  vanish  completely 
[  210  ] 


TIMOTHY  BONDAREF  211 

and  be  forgotten  ;  but  what  Bondaref  has  said,  and 
that  to  which  he  has  called  men,  will  not  be  forgotten 
— for  life  itself  will  bring  men  more  and  more  to  see 
the  force  of  his  statements. 

All  discoveries  of  truth,  whether  in  science  (abstract 
or  applied),  in  philosophy,  in  morals,  or  in  economics, 
are  reached  by  people  going  round  the  new  truths  in 
ever-narrowing  circles,  drawing  nearer  and  nearer  to 
them,  and  sometimes  slightly  touching  them,  until  some 
bold,  free,  and  gifted  man  seizes  the  very  centre  of  the 
new  truth,  and  places  it  on  a  height  where  it  is  visible 
to  all.  This  is  just  what  Bondaref  has  done  for  the 
moral-economic  truth  which  was  awaiting  discovery 
and  elucidation  in  our  time.  Many  have  said,  and  are 
saying,  the  same  thing.  Some  consider  physical  labour 
necessary  for  health  ;  others  consider  it  essential  for  a 
just  economic  order  ;  a  third  group  show  its  necessity 
for  the  normal,  all-round  development  of  man's  capaci- 
ties; while  a  fourth  group  considers  it  essential  for 
man's  moral  progress.  Thus,  for  instance,  Ruskin — 
one  of  the  greatest  English  writers,  and  one  of  the 
greatest  authors  of  our  age  (almost  as  little  esteemed 
as  our  own  Bondaref  by  the  cultured  crowd  of  to-day) 
— notwithstanding  the  fact  that  he  is  a  most  highly 
educated  and  refined  man  (i.e.,  notwithstanding  the  fact 
that  he  stands  at  the  opposite  pole  of  society  from 
Bondaref),  in  Letter  67  of  his  Fors  Olavigera,  says  : — 
6  It  is  physically  impossible  that  true  religious  knowledge, 
or  pure  morality,  should  exist  among  any  classes  of  a 
nation  who  do  not  work  with  their  hands  for  their 
bread. ' 

Many  go  round  this  truth  and  express  it  (as  Ruskin 
does)  with  various  reservations,  but  no  one  else  has 
done  what  Bondaref  does  in  acknowledging  bread- 
labour  to  be  the  fundamental  religious  law  of  life. 
And  he  has  not  done  this,  as  it  pleases  people  to  sup- 
pose, because  he  is  an  ignorant  and  foolish  man  who 
does  not  know  all  that  we  know ;  but  he  has  done  it 
because  he  is  a  man  of  genius,  who  knows  that  truth 
is  only  then  the  truth,  when  it  is  expressed,  not  with 

o  2 


212  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

limitations,  reservations  and  retrenchments,  but  when 
it  is  expressed  fully.  As  the  truth  that  the  sum  of  the 
angles  in  a  right-angled  triangle  is  equal  to  two  right 
angles,  loses  all  meaning  and  importance  if  it  is  ex- 
pressed thus  :  that  the  sum  of  the  angles  in  the  triangle 
will  be  approximately  equal  to  two  right  angles — so 
also  the  truth  that  a  man  ought  to  work  with  his  hands, 
if  expressed  in  the  form  of  advice,  or  of  an  expression 
of  its  desirability,  or  of  an  assertion  that  perhaps  it 
may  be  useful  from  certain  points  of  view,  etc.,  loses 
all  its  meaning  and  importance.  This  truth  has  mean- 
ing and  importance  only  when  it  is  expressed  as  an 
absolute  law,  the  infringement  of  which  involves  in- 
evitable ills  and  sufferings,  and  the  observance  of  which 
is  demanded  of  us  by  God,  or  by  reason — as  Bdndaref 
expresses  it.  Bdndaref  does  not  demand  that  every 
man  should  absolutely  put  on  peasant's  shoes  and 
follow  the  plough,  though  he  says  that  that  would  be 
desirable  and  would  liberate  people  sunk  in  luxury 
from  the  delusions  that  torment  them  (really,  nothing 
but  good  would  come  from  exact  obedience  even  to  that 
demand) ;  but  Bdndaref  says  that  every  man  should 
consider  the  duty  of  physical  labour — of  direct  partici- 
pation in  those  labours  of  which  he  enjoys  the  fruits — 
as  his  first,  chief,  and  indubitably  sacred  obligation, 
and  that  people  should  be  brought  up  to  recognise  that 
duty.  And  I  cannot  conceive  how  any  honest  and 
thoughtful  person  can  disagree  with  that  opinion. 

[1897.] 

The  above  article  was  contributed  to  Venge>of  s  Biographi- 
cal Dictionary  of  Russian  Writers.  Concerning  Bdndaref, 
see  foot-note,  p.  1,  of  this  volume. 


XVI 
LETTERS  ON  HENRY  GEORGE 


To  T.  M.  Bondaref  who  had  written  from  Siberia  asking 
for  information  about  the  Single-Tax, 

This  is  Henry  George's  plan  : 

The  advantage  and  convenience  of  using  land  is  not 
everywhere  the  same  ;  there  will  always  be  many  appli- 
cants for  land  that  is  fertile,  well  situated,  or  near  a 
populous  place  ;  and  the  better  and  more  profitable 
the  land,  the  more  people  will  wish  to  have  it.  All  such 
land  should,  therefore,  be  valued  according  to  its 
advantages :  the  more  profitable — dearer  ;  the  less 
profitable — cheaper.  Land  for  which  there  are  few 
applicants  should  not  be  valued  at  all,  but  allotted 
gratuitously  to  those  who  wish  to  work  it  themselves. 

With  such  a  valuation  of  the  land — here  in  the 
Toula  Government,  for  instance, — good  arable  land 
might  be  estimated  at  about  5  or  6  roubles*  the 
desyatina  ;t  kitchen-gardens  in  the  villages,  at  about 
10  roubles  the  desyatina ;  meadows  that  are  fertilized  by 
spring  floods  at  about  15  roubles,  and  so  on.  In  towns 
the  valuation  would  be  100  to  500  roubles  the  desyatina, 
and  in  crowded  parts  of  Moscow  or  Petersburg,  or  at 
the  landing-places  of  navigable  rivers,  it  would  amount 
to  several  thousands  or  even  tens  of  thousands  of 
roubles  the  desyatina. 

*  The  rouble  is  a  little  more  than  25  pence, 
t  The  desyatina  is  nearly  2|  acres. 
[213  ] 


214  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

When  all  the  land  in  the  country  has  been  valued 
in  this  way,  Henry  George  proposes  that  a  law  should 
be  made  by  which,  after  a  certain  date  in  a  certain 
year,  the  land  should  no  longer  belong  to  any  one 
individual,  but  to  the  whole  nation — the  whole  people  ; 
and  that  everyone  holding  land  should,  therefore,  pay 
to  the  nation  (that  is,  to  the  whole  people)  the  yearly 
value  at  which  it  has  been  assessed.  This  payment 
should  be  used  to  meet  all  public  or  national  expenses, 
and  should  replace  all  other  rates,  taxes,  or  customs  dues. 

The  result  of  this  would  be  that  a  landed  proprietor 
who  now  holds,  say,  2,000  desyatina,  might  continue 
to  hold  them  if  he  liked,  but  he  would  have  to  pay 
to  the  treasury — here  in  the  Toula  Government,  for 
instance  (as  his  holding  would  include  both  meadow- 
land  and  homestead) — 12,000  or  15,000  roubles  a  year; 
and,  as  no  large  land-owners  could  stand  such  a  pay- 
ment, they  would  all  abandon  their  land.  But  it 
would  mean  that  a  Toula  peasant,  in  the  same  district, 
would  pay  a  couple  of  roubles  per  desyatina  less  than 
he  pa^s  now,  and  could  have  plenty  of  available  land 
near  by,  which  he  would  take  up  at  5  or  6  roubles  per 
desyatina.  Besides,  he  would  have  no  other  rates  or 
taxes  to  pay,  and  would  be  able  to  buy  all  the  things 
he  requires,  foreign  or  Russian,  free  of  duty.  In 
towns,  the  owners  of  houses  and  manufactories  might 
continue  to  own  them,  but  would  have  to  pay  to  the 
public  treasury  the  amount  of  the  assessment  on  their 
land. 

The  advantages  of  such  an  arrangement  would  be  : 

1.  That  no  one  will  be  unable  to  get  land  for  use. 

2.  That  there  will  be  no  idle  people  owning  land 
and  making  others  work  for  them  in  return  for  per- 
mission to  use  that  land. 

3.  That  the  land  will  be  in  the  possession  of  those 
who  use  it,  and  not  of  those  who  do  not  use  it. 

4.  That  as  the  land  will  be  available  for  people  who 
wish  to  work  on  it,  they  will  cease  to  enslave  them- 
selves as  hands  in  factories  and  works,  or  as  servants  in 
towns,  and  will  settle  in  the  country  districts. 


LETTERS  ON  HENRY  GEORGE  215 

5.  That  there  will  be  no  more  inspectors  and  collec- 
tors of  taxes  in  mills,  factories,  refineries  and  work- 
shops, but  there  will  only  be  collectors  of  the  tax  on 
land  which  cannot  be  stolen,  and  from  which  a  tax 
can  be  most  easily  collected. 

6  (and  chiefly).  That  the  non-workers  will  be  saved 
from  the  sin  of  exploiting  other  people's  labour  (in  doing 
which  they  are  often  not  the  guilty  parties,  for  they 
have  from  childhood  been  educated  in  idleness,  and  do 
not  know  how  to  work),  and  from  the  yet  greater  sin 
of  all  kinds  of  shuffling  and  lying  to  justify  themselves 
in  commiting  that  sin  ;  and  the  workers  will  be  saved 
from  the  temptation  and  sin  of  envying,  condemning 
and  being  exasperated  with  the  non-workers,  so  that 
one  cause  of  separation  among  men  will  be  destroyed. 


To  a  German  Propagandist  of  Henry  George's  Views. 

It  is  with  particular  pleasure  that  I  hasten  to  answer 
your  letter,  and  say  that  I  have  known  of  Henry  George 
since  the  appearance  of  his  Social  Problems.  I  read 
that  book  and  was  struck  by  the  justice  of  his  main 
thought — by  the  exceptional  manner  (unparalleled  in 
scientific  literature),  clear,  popular  and  forcible,  in 
which  he  stated  his  cause — and  especially  by  (what  is 
also  exceptional  in  scientific  literature)  the  Christian 
spirit  that  permeates  the  whole  work.  After  reading 
it  I  went  back  to  his  earlier  Progress  and  Poverty,  and 
still  more  deeply  appreciated  the  importance  of  its 
author's  activity. 

You  ask  what  I  think  of  Henry  George's  activity,  and 
of  his  Single-Tax  system.    My  opinion  is  the  following  : 

Humanity  constantly  advances:  on  the  one  hand  clear- 
ing its  consciousness  and  conscience,  and  on  the  other 
hand  rearranging  its  modes  of  life  to  suit  this  changing 
consciousness.  Thus,  at  each  period  of  the  life  of 
humanity,  the  double  process  goes  on  :  the  clearing  up 


216  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

of  conscience,  and  the  incorporation  into  life  of  what 
has  been  made  clear  to  conscience. 

At  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  and  the  com- 
mencement of  the  nineteenth,  a  clearing  up  of  con- 
science took  place  in  Christendom  with  reference  to  the 
labouring  classes — who  lived  under  various  forms  of 
slavery — and  this  was  followed  by  a  corresponding  read- 
justment of  the  forms  of  social  life,  to  suit  this  clearer 
consciousness  :  namely,  the  abolition  of  slavery,  and  the 
organization  of  free  wage-labour  in  its  place.  At  the 
present  time  an  enlightenment  of  men's  consciences  is 
going  on  in  relation  to  the  way  land  is  used  ;  and  soon, 
it  seems  to  me,  a  practical  application  of  this  new 
consciousness  must  follow. 

And  in  this  process  (the  enlightenment  of  conscience 
as  to  the  utilization  of  land,  and  the  practical  applica- 
tion of  that  new  consciousness),  which  is  one  of  the 
chief  problems  of  our  time,  the  leader  and  organizer  of 
the  movement  was  and  is  Henry  George.  In  this  lies 
his  immense,  his  pre-eminent,  importance.  He  has 
helped  ]>y  his  excellent  books,  both  to  clear  men's 
minds  and  consciences  on  this  question,  and  to  place  it 
on  a  practical  footing. 

But  in  relation  to  the  abolition  of  the  shameful  right 
to  own  landed  estates,  something  is  occurring  similar  to 
what  happened  (within  our  own  recollection)  with  refer- 
ence to  the  abolition  of  serfdom.  The  Government  and 
the  governing  classes — knowing  that  their  position  and 
privileges  are  bound  up  with  the  land  question — pretend 
that  they  are  preoccupied  with  the  welfare  of  the  people, 
organizing  savings  banks  for  workmen,  factory  inspec- 
tion, income  taxes,  even  eight-hours  working  days — 
and  carefully  ignore  the  land  question,  or  even,  aided 
by  compliant  science,  which  will  demonstrate  anything 
they  like,  declare  that  the  expropriation  of  the  land  is 
useless,  harmful,  and  impossible. 

Just  the  same  thing  occurs,  as  occurred  in  connection 
with  slavery.  At  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  and  the 
beginning  of  the  nineteenth  centuries,  men  had  long 
felt  that  slavery  was  a  terrible  anachronism,  revolting 


LETTERS  ON  HENRY  GEORGE  217 

to  the  human  soul ;  but  pseudo-religion  and  pseudo- 
science  demonstrated  that  slavery  was  not  wrong,  that 
it  was  necessary,  or  at  least  that  it  was  premature  to 
abolish  it.  The  same  thing  is  now  being  repeated  with 
reference  to  landed  property.  As  before,  pseudo- 
religion  and  pseudo-science  demonstrate  that  there  is 
nothing  wrong  in  the  private  ownership  of  landed 
estates,  and  that  there  is  no  need  to  abolish  the  present 
system. 

One  would  think  it  would  be  plain  to  every  educated 
man  of  our  time  that  an  exclusive  control  of  land  by 
people  who  do  not  work  on  it,  but  who  prevent 
hundreds  and  thousands  of  poor  families  from  using 
it,  is  a  thing  as  plainly  bad  and  shameful  as  it  was  to 
own  slaves ;  yet  we  see  educated,  refined  aristocrats — 
English,  Austrian,  Prussian,  and  Russian — making 
use  of  this  cruel  and  shameful  right,  and  not  only  not 
feeling  ashamed,  but  feeling  proud  of  it. 

Religion  blesses  such  possessions,  and  the  science  of 
political  economy  demonstrates  that  the  present  state  of 
things  is  the  one  that  should  exist  for  the  greatest 
benefit  of  mankind. 

The  service  rendered  by  Henry  George  is,  that  he 
has  not  only  mastered  "the  sophistries  with  which 
religion  and  science  try  to  justify  private  ownership  of 
land,  and  simplified  the  question  to  the  uttermost,  so 
that  it  is  impossible  not  to  admit  the  wrongfulness  of 
land-ownership — unless  one  simply  stops  one's  ears — 
but  he  was  also  the  first  to  show  how  the  question  can 
be  practically  solved.  He  first  gave  a  clear  and  direct 
reply  to  the  excuses,  used  by  the  enemies  of  every 
reform,  to  the  effect  that  the  demands  of  progress  are 
unpractical  and  inapplicable  dreams. 

Henry  George's  plan  destroys  that  excuse,  by  putting 
the  question  in  such  a  form  that  a  committee  might 
be  assembled  to-morrow  to  discuss  the  project  and  to 
convert  it  into  law.  In  Russia,  for  instance,  the  dis- 
cussion of  land  purchase,  or  of  nationalizing  the  land 
without  compensation,  could  begin  to-morrow  ;  and  the 
project  might — after  undergoing  various  vicissitudes — 


218  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

be  carried  into  operation,  as  occurred  thirty-three 
years  ago*  with  the  project  for  the  emancipation  of 
the  serfs. 

The  need  of  altering  the  present  system  has  been 
explained,  and  the  possibility  of  the  change  has  been 
shown  (there  may  be  alterations  and  amendments  of 
the  Single-Tax  system,  but  its  fundamental  idea  is 
practicable) ;  and,  therefore,  it  will  be  impossible  for 
people  not  to  do  what  their  reason  demands.  It  is 
only  necessary  that  this  thought  should  become  public 
opinion ;  and  in  order  that  it  may  become  public 
opinion  it  must  be  spread  abroad  and  explained — 
which  is  just  what  you  are  doing,  and  is  a  work  with 
which  I  sympathize  with  my  whole  soul,  and  in  which  I 
wish  you  success. 

[1897.] 

*  The  Emancipation  of  the  Serfs  in  Russia  was  decreed 
in  1861,  and  was  accomplished  during  the  following  few 
years. , 


XVII 
MODERN  SCIENCE* 

TcavTi  \6ytp  Xoyoc  "hjoq  dvrucBiTal.jf 

I  think  this  article  of  Carpenter's  on  Modern  Science 
should  be  particularly  useful  in  Russian  society,  in 
which,  more  than  in  any  other  in  Europe,  a  supersti- 
tion is  prevalent  and  deeply  rooted  which  considers  that 
humanity  for  its  welfare  does  not  need  the  diffusion  of 
true  religious  and  moral  knowledge,  but  only  the  study 
of  experimental  science,  and  that  such  science  will 
satisfy  all  the  spiritual  demands  of  mankind. 

It  is  evident  how  harmful  an  influence  (quite  like 
that  of  religious  superstition)  so  gross  a  superstition 
must  have  on  men's  moral  life.  And,  therefore,  the 
publication  of  the  thoughts  of  writers  who  treat  experi- 
mental science  and  its  method  critically  is  specially 
desirable  in  our  society. 

Carpenter  shows  that  neither  Astronomy,  nor 
Physics,  nor  Chemistry,  nor  Biology,  nor  Sociology, 
supplies  us  with  true  knowledge  of  actual  facts  ;  that 
all  the  laws  discovered  by  those  sciences  are  merely 
generalizations,  having  but  an  approximate  value  as 
laws,  and  that  only  as  long  as  we  do  not  know,  or  leave 

*  "Written  as  preface  to  a  Russian  translation,  by  Count 
Sergius  Tolstoy,  of  Edward  Carpenter's  essay,  Modem 
Science :  a  Criticism,  which  forms  part  of  the  volume 
Civilization:  its  Cause  and  Cure,  published  by  Swan 
Sonnenschein  and  Co. ,  London. 

f  To  every  argument  an  equal  argument  is  matched. 
[  219  ] 


220  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

out  of  account,  certain  other  factors  ;  and  that  even 
these  laws  seem  laws  to  us  only  because  we  discover 
them  in  a  region  so  far  away  from  us  in  time  and 
space  that  we  cannot  detect  their  non-correspondence 
with  actual  fact. 

Moreover,  Carpenter  points  out  that  the  method  of 
science,  which  consists  in  explaining  things  near  and 
important  to  us  by  things  more  remote  and  indifferent, 
is  a  false  method  which  can  never  bring  us  to  the 
desired  result. 

He  says  that  every  science  tries  to  explain  the  facts 
it  is  investigating  by  means  of  conceptions  of  a  lower 
order.  'Each  science  has  been  (as  far  as  possible) 
reduced  to  its  lowest  terms.  Ethics  has  been  made  a 
question  of  utility  and  inherited  experience.  Politi- 
cal Economy  has  been  exhausted  of  all  concep- 
tions of  justice  between  man  and  man,  of  charity, 
affection,  and  the  instinct  of  solidarity,  and  has  been 
founded  on  its  lowest  discoverable  factor,  namely,  self- 
interest.  Biology  has  been  denuded  of  the  force  of 
personality  in  plants,  animals,  and  men  ;  the  c  self ' 
here  has  been  set  aside,  and  the  attempt  made  to 
reduce  the  science  to  a  question  of  chemical  and 
cellular  affinities,  protoplasm,  and  the  laws  of  osmose. 
Chemical  affinities,  again,  and  all  thewonderful  pheno- 
mena of  Physics  are  emptied  down  into  a  flight  of 
atoms  ;  and  the  flight  of  atoms  (and  of  astronomic  orbs 
as  well)  is  reduced  to  the  laws  of  dynamics.' 

It  is  supposed  that  the  reduction  of  questions  of  a 
higher  order  to  questions  of  a  lower  order  will  explain 
the  former.  But  an  explanation  is  never  obtained  in 
this  way,  and  what  happens  is  merely  that,  descending 
in  one's  investigations  ever  lower  and  lower,  from  the 
most  important  questions  to  less  important  ones,  science 
reaches  at  last  a  sphere  quite  foreign  to  man,  with 
which  he  is  barely  in  touch,  and  confines  its  attention 
to  that  sphere,  leaving  all  unsolved  the  questions  most 
important  to  him. 

What  takes  place  is  as  if  a  man,  wishing  to  under- 


MODERN  SCIENCE  221 

stand  the  use  of  an  object  lying  before  him — instead  of 
coming  close  to  it,  examining  it  from  all  sides  and 
handling  it — were  to  retire  further  and  further  from 
it,  until  he  was  at  such  a  distance  from  the  object  that 
all  its  peculiarities  of  colour  and  inequalities  of  surface 
had  disappeared,  and  only  its  outline  was  still  visible 
against  the  horizon ;  and  as  if,  from  there,  he  were  to 
begin  writing  a  minute  description  of  the  object, 
imagining  that  now,  at  last,  he  clearly  understood  it, 
and  that  this  understanding,  formed  at  such  a  distance, 
would  assist  a  complete  comprehension  of  it.  And  it 
is  this  self-deception  that  is  partly  exposed  by  Carpenter's 
criticism,  which  shows,  first,  that  the  knowledge  afforded 
us  by  the  natural  sciences  amounts  merely  to  convenient 
generalizations,  which  certainly  do  not  express  actual 
facts ;  and,  secondly,  that  the  method  of  science  by 
which  facts  of  a  higher  order  are  reduced  to  facts  of  a 
lower  order,  will  never  furnish  us  with  an  explanation 
of  the  former. 

But  without  predetermining  the  question  whether 
experimental  science  will,  or  will  not,  by  its  methods, 
ever  bring  us  to  the  solution  of  the  most  serious  problems 
of  human  life,  the  activity  of  experimental  science 
itself,  in  its  relation  to  the  eternal  and  most  reasonable 
demands  of  man,  is  so  anomalous  as  to  amaze  one. 

People  must  live.  But  in  order  to  live  they  must 
know  how  to  live.  And  all  men  always  obtained  this 
knowledge — well  or  ill — and  in  conformity  with  it  have 
lived,  and  progressed  ;  and  this  knowledge  of  how  men 
should  live  has  from  the  days  of  Moses,  Solon,  and 
Confucius  been  always  considered  a  science — the  very 
essence  of  science.  And  only  in  our  time  has  it  come 
to  be  considered  that  the  science  telling  us  how  to  live, 
is  not  a  science  at  all,  but  that  only  experimental 
science — commencing  with  Mathematics  and  ending  in 
Sociology — is  real  science. 

And  a  strange  misunderstanding  results. 

A  plain,  reasonable  working  man  supposes,  in  the  old 
way  which  is  also  the  common-sense  way,  that  if  there 


222  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

are  people  who  spend  their  lives  in  study,  whom  he 
feeds  and  keeps  while  they  think  for  him — then  no 
doubt  these  men  are  engaged  in  studying  things  men 
need  to  know ;  and  he  expects  of  science  that  it  will 
solve  for  him  the  'questions  on  which  his  welfare,  and 
that  of  all  men,  depends.  He  expects  science  to  tell 
him  how  he  ought  to  live  :  how  to  treat  his  family,  his 
neighbours  and  the  men  of  other  tribes,  how  to  re- 
strain his  passions,  what  to  believe  in  and  what  not  to 
believe  in,  and  much  else.  And  what  does  our  science 
say  to  him  on  these  matters  ? 

It  triumphantly  tells  him :  how  many  million  miles 
it  is  from  the  earth  to  the  sun ;  at  what  rate  light 
travels  through  space  ;  how  many  million  vibrations  of 
ether  per  second  are  caused  by  light,  and  how  many 
vibrations  of  air  by  sound ;  it  tells  of  the  chemical 
components  of  the  Milky  Way,  of  a  new  element — 
helium — of  micro-organisms  and  their  excrements,  of 
the  points  on  the  hand  at  which  electricity  collects,  of 
X  rays,  and  similar  things. 

c  Biit  I  don't  want  any  of  those  things/  says  a  plain 
and  reasonable  man — eI  want  to  know  how  to  live/ 

4  What  does  it  matter  what  you  want  ?'  replies  science. 
'  What  you  are  asking  about  relates  to  Sociology.  Be- 
fore replying  to  sociological  questions,  we  have  yet  to 
solve  questions  of  Zoology,  Botany,  Physiology,  and,  in 
general,  of  Biology  ;  but  to  solve  those  questions  we 
have  first  to  solve  questions  of  Physics,  and  then  of 
Chemistry,  and  have  also  to  agree  as  to  the  shape  of 
the  infinitesimal  atoms,  and  how  it  is  that  imponderable 
and  incompressible  ether  transmits  energy/ 

And  people — chiefly  those  who  sit  on  the  backs  of 
others,  and  to  whom  it  is  therefore  convenient  to  wait 
— are  content  with  such  replies,  and  sit  blinking,  await- 
ing the  fulfilment  of  these  promises ;  but  a  plain  and 
reasonable  working  man — such  as  those  on  whose  backs 
these  others  sit  while  occupying  themselves  with  science 
—the  whole  great  mass  of  men,  the  whole  of  humanity, 
cannot  be  satisfied  by  such  answers,  but  naturally  ask 


MODERN  SCIENCE  223 

in  perplexity  :  '  But  when  will  this  be  done  ?  We  can- 
not wait.  You  say  yourselves  that  you  will  discover 
these  things  after  some  generations.  But  we  are  alive 
now — alive  to-day  and  dead  to-morrow — and  we  want 
to  know  how  to  live  our  life  while  we  have  it.  So 
teach  us  P 

6  What  a  stupid  and  uneducated  man  P  replies  science. 
<  He  does  not  understand  that  science  exists  not  for  use, 
but  for  science.  Science  studies  whatever  presents  itself 
for  study,  and  cannot  select  the  subjects  to  be  studied. 
Science  studies  everything.  That  is  the  characteristic 
of  science/ 

And  scientists  are  really  convinced  that  to  be  occu- 
pied with  trifles,  while  neglecting  what  is  more  essential 
and  important,  is  a  characteristic  not  of  themselves,  but 
of  science.  The  plain,  reasonable  man,  however,  be- 
gins to  suspect  that  this  characteristic  pertains  not  to 
science,  but  to  men  who  are  inclined  to  occupy  them- 
selves with  trifles  and  to  attach  great  importance  to 
those  trifles. 

(  Science  studies  everything?  say  the  scientists.  But, 
really,  everything  is  too  much.  Everything  is  an  infinite 
quantity  of  objects ;  it  is  impossible  at  one  and  the 
same  time  to  study  all.  As  a  lantern  cannot  light  up 
everything,  but  only  lights  up  the  place  on  which  it  is 
turned  or  the  direction  in  which  the  man  carrying  it  is 
walking,  so  also  science  cannot  study  everything,  but 
inevitably  only  studies  that  to  which  its  attention  is 
directed.  And  as  a  lantern  lights  up  most  strongly  the 
place  nearest  to  it,  and  less  and  less  strongly  objects 
that  are  more  and  more  remote  from  it,  and  does  not 
at  all  light  up  those  things  its  light  does  not  reach,  so 
also  human  science,  of  whatever  kind,  has  always 
studied  and  still  studies  most  carefully  what  seems 
most  important  to  the  investigators,  less  carefully  what 
seems  to  them  less  important,  and  quite  neglects  the 
whole  remaining  infinite  quantity  of  objects.  And 
what  for  men  has  defined  and  still  defines  the  subjects 
they  are  to  consider  most  important,  less  important, 


224  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

and  unimportant,  is  the  general  understanding  of  the 
meaning  and  purpose  of  life  (that  is  to  say,  the  religion) 
possessed  by  those  who  occupy  themselves  with  science. 
13ut  men  of  science  to-day — not  acknowledging  any 
religion,  and  having  therefore  no  standard  by  which  to 
choose  the  subjects  most  important  for  study,  or  to 
discriminate  them  from  less  important  subjects  and, 
ultimately,  from  that  infinite  quantity  of  objects  which 
the  limitations  of  the  human  mind,  and  the  infinity  of 
the  number  of  those  objects,  will  always  cause  to  remain 
uninvestigated — have  formed  for  themselves  a  theory 
of  c  science  for  science's  sake/  according  to  which 
science  is  to  study  not  what  mankind  needs,  but 
everything. 

And,  indeed,  experimental  science  studies  every- 
thing, not  in  the  sense  of  the  totality  of  objects,  but  in 
the  sense  of  disorder — chaos  in  the  arrangement  of  the 
objects  studied.  That  is  to  say,  science  does  not  devote 
most  attention  to  what  people  most  need,  less  to  what 
they,  need  less,  and  none  at  all  to  what  is  quite  useless, 
but  it  studies  anything  that  happens  to  come  to  hand. 
Though  Comtek  and  other  classifications  of  the  sciences 
exist,  these  classifications  do  not  govern  the  selection 
of  subjects  for  study,  but  that  selection  is  dependent 
on  the  human  weaknesses  common  to  men  of  science 
as  well  as  to  the  rest  of  mankind.  So  that,  in  reality, 
scientists  study  not  everything,  as  they  imagine  and  de- 
clare, but  they  study  what  is  more  profitable  and  easier 
to  study.  And  it  is  more  profitable  to  study  things 
that  conduce  to  the  well-being  of  the  upper  classes, 
with  whom  the  men  of  science  are  connected  ;  and  it  is 
easier  to  study  things  that  lack  life.  Accordingly, 
many  men  of  science  study  books,  monuments,  and 
inanimate  bodies. 

Such  study  is  considered  the  most  real  ( science.' 
So  that  in  our  day  what  is  considered  to  be  the  most 
real  ( science/  the  only  one  (as  the  Bible  was  considered 
the  only  book  worthy  of  the  name),  is,  not  the  con- 
templation and  investigation  of  how  to  make  the  life  of 


MODERN  SCIENCE  225 

man  more  kindly  and  more  happy,  but  the  compilation 
and  copying  from  many  books  into  one  of  all  that  our 
predecessors  wrote  on  a  certain  subject,  the  pouring  of 
liquids  out  of  one  glass  bottle  into  another,  the  skilful 
slicing  of  microscopic  preparations,  the  cultivation  of 
bacteria,  the  cutting  up  of  frogs  and  dogs,  the  investi- 
gation of  X  rays,  the  theory  of  numbers,  the  chemical 
composition  of  the  stars,  etc. 

Meanwhile  all  those  sciences  which  aim  at  making 
human  life  kindlier  and  happier — religious,  moral,  and 
social  science — are  considered  by  the  dominant  science 
to  be  unscientific,  and  are  abandoned  to  the  theologians, 
philosophers,  jurists,  historians,  and  political  econo- 
mists ;  who,  under  the  guise  of  scientific  investigation, 
are  chiefly  occupied  in  demonstrating  that  the  existing 
order  of  society  (the  advantages  of  which  they  enjoy) 
is  the  very  one  which  ought  to  exist,  and  that,  there- 
fore, it  must  not  only  not  be  changed,  but  must  be 
maintained  by  all  means. 

Not  to  mention  Theology  and  Jurisprudence, 
Political  Economy,  the  most  advanced  of  the  sciences 
of  this  group,  is  remarkable  in  this  respect.  The  most 
prevalent  Political  Economy  (that  of  Karl  Marx),* 
accepting  the  existing  order  of  life  as  though  it  were 
what  it  ought  to  be,  not  only  does  not  call  on  men  to 
alter  that  order — that  is  to  say,  does  not  point  out  to 
them  how  they  ought  to  live  that  their  condition  may 
improve — but,  on  the  contrary,  it  demands  an  increase 
in  the  cruelty  of  the  existing  order  of  things,  that  its 
more-than-questionable  predictions  may  be  fulfilled, 
concerning  what  will  happen  if  people  continue  to  live 
as  badly  as  they  are  now  living. 

And,  as  always  occurs,  the  lower  a  human  activity 
descends — the  more  widely  it  diverges  from  what  it 
should  be — the  more  its  self-confidence  increases.    That 

*  In  Russia  the  rigid  theories  of  Karl  Marx,  and  the 
German  type  of  Social  Democracy,  have  had,  and  still  have, 
more  vogue  than  in  England. 

p 


226  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

is  just  what  has  happened  with  the  science  of  to-day. 
True  science  is  never  appreciated  by  its  contemporaries;, 
but  on  the  contrary  is  usually  persecuted.  Nor  can 
this  be  otherwise.  True  science  shows  men  their  mis- 
takes, and  points  to  new,  unaccustomed  ways  of  life. 
And  both  these  services  are  unpleasant  to  the  ruling 
section  of  society.  But  present-day  science  not  only 
does  not  run  counter  to  the  tastes  and  demands  of  the 
ruling  section  of  society,  but  it  quite  complies  with 
them  :  it  satisfies  idle  curiosity,  excites  people's  wonder, 
and  promises  them  increase  of  pleasure.  And  so, 
whereas  all  that  is  truly  great  is  calm,  modest  and 
unnoticed,  the  science  of  to-day  knows  no  limits  to  its 
self-laudation. 

6  All  former  methods  were  erroneous,  and  all  that 
used  to  be  considered  science  was  an  imposture,  a 
blunder,  and  of  no  account.  Only  our  method  is  true, 
and  the  only  true  science  is  ours.  The  success  of  our 
science  is  such  that  thousands  of  years  have  not  done 
what  we  have  accomplished  in  the  last  century.  In  the 
future,  travelling  the  same  path,  our  science  will  solve 
all  questions,  and  make  all  mankind  happy.  Our 
science  is  the  most  important  activity  in  the  world,  and 
we,  men  of  science,  are  the  most  important  and  neces- 
sary people  in  the  world/ 

So  think  and  say  the  scientists  of  to-day,  and  the 
cultured  crowd  echo  it,  but  really  at  no  previous  time 
and  among  no  people  has  science — the  whole  of  science 
with  all  its  knowledge — stood  on  so  low  a  level  as  at 
present.  One  part  of  it,  which  should  study  the  things 
that  make  human  life  kind  and  happy,  is  occupied  in 
justifying  the  existing  evil  order  of  society  ;  another 
part  is  engaged  in  solving  questions  of  idle  curiosity. 

(  What? — Idle  curiosity  r  I  hear  voices  ask  in  indig- 
nation at  such  blasphemy.  '  What  about  steam,  and 
electricity,  and  telephones,  and  all  our  technical 
improvements  ?  Not  to  speak  of  their  scientific  impor- 
tance, see  what  practical  results  they  have  produced  ! 
Man  has  conquered  Nature  and  subjugated  its  forces ' 
.   .  .  with  more  to  the  same  effect. 


MODERN  SCIENCE  227 

'But  all  the  practical  results  of  the  victories  over 
Nature  have  till  now — for  a  considerable  time  past — 
gone  to  factories  that  injure  the  workmen's  health  ; 
have  produced  weapons  to  kill  men  with,  and  increased 
luxury  and  corruption' — replies  a  plain,  reasonable 
man — *  and,  therefore,  the  victory  of  man  over  Nature 
has  not  only  failed  to  increase  the  welfare  of  human 
beings,  but  has,  on  the  contrary,  made  their  condition 
worse.' 

If  the  arrangement  of  society  is  bad  (as  ours  is),  and 
a  small  number  of  people  have  power  over  the  majority 
and  oppress  it,  every  victory  over  Nature  will  inevitably 
only  serve  to  increase  that  power  and  that  oppression. 
That  is  what  is  actually  happening. 

With  a  science  which  aims  not  at  studying  how 
people  ought  to  live,  but  at  studying  whatever  exists — 
and  which  is  therefore  occupied  chiefly  in  investigating 
inanimate  things  while  allowing  the  order  of  human 
society  to  remain  as  it  is — no  improvements,  no  victories 
over  Nature,  can  better  the  state  of  humanity. 

1  But  medical  science  ?  You  are  forgetting  the  bene- 
ficent progress  made  by  medicine.  And  bacteriological 
inoculations?  And  recent  surgical  operations?'  ex- 
claim the  defenders  of  science, — adducing  as  a  last 
resource  the  success  of  medical  science  to  prove  the 
utility  of  all  science.  '  By  inoculations  we  can  prevent 
illness,  or  can  cure  it ;  we  can  perform  painless  opera- 
tions :  cut  open  a  man's  inside  and  clean  it  out,  and 
can  straighten  hunched-backs/  is  what  is  usually  said 
by  the  defenders  of  present-day  science,  who  seem  to 
think  that  the-  curing  of  one  child  from  diphtheria, 
among  those  Russian  children  of  whom  50  per  cent, 
(and  even  80  per  cent,  in  the  Foundling  Hospitals)  die 
as  a  regular  thing  apart  from  diphtheria — must  con- 
vince anyone  of  the  beneficence  of  science  in  general. 

Our  life  is  so  arranged  that  from  bad  food,  excessive 
and  harmful  work,  bad  dwellings  and  clothes,  or  from 
want,  not  children  only,  but  a  majority  of  people,  dfe 
before  they  have  lived  half  the  years  that  should  be 

p  2 


228  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

theirs.  The  order  of  things  is  such  that  children's  ill- 
nesses, consumption,  syphilis  and  alcoholism  seize  an 
ever-increasing  number  of  victims,  while  a  great  part 
of  men's  labour  is  taken  from  them  to  prepare  for  wars, 
and  every  ten  or  twenty  years  millions  of  men  are 
slaughtered  in  wars ;  and  all  this  because  science,  instead 
of  supplying  correct  religious,  moral  and  social  ideas, 
which  would  cause  these  ills  to  disappear  of  themselves, 
is  occupied  on  the  one  hand  in  justifying  the  existing 
order,  and  on  the  other  hand — with  toys.  And,  in 
proof  of  the  fruitfulness  of  science,  we  are  told  that  it 
cures  one  in  a  thousand  of  the  sick,  who  are  sick  only 
because  science  has  neglected  its  proper  business. 

Yes,  if  science  would  devote  but  a  small  part  of  those 
efforts,  and  of  that  attention  and  labour  which  it  now 
spends  on  trifles,  to  supplying  men  with  correct  re- 
ligious, moral,  social,  or  even  hygienic  ideas,  there 
would  not  be  a  one-hundredth  part  of  the  diphtheria, 
the  diseases  of  the  womb,  or  the  deformities,  the  occa- 
sional cure  of  which  now  makes  science  so  proud, 
thougli  they  are  effected  in  clinical  hospitals,  the  cost 
of  whose  luxurious  appointments  is  too  great  for  them 
to  be  at  the  service  of  all  who  need  them. 

It  is  as  though  men  who  had  ploughed  badly,  and 
sown  badly  with  poor  seeds,  were  to  go  over  the  ground 
tending  some  broken  ears  of  corn  and  trampling  on 
others  that  grew  alongside,  and  should  then  exhibit 
their  skill  in  healing  the  injured  ears,  as  a  proof  of 
their  knowledge  of  agriculture. 

Our  science,  in  order  to  become  science  and  to  be 
really  useful  and  not  harmful  to  humanity,  must  first 
of  all  renounce  its  experimental  method,  which  causes 
it  to  consider  as  its  duty  the  study  merely  of  what 
exists,  and  must  return  to  the  only  reasonable  and 
fruitful  conception  of  science,  which  is,  that  the  object 
of  science  is  to  show  how  people  ought  to  live.  Therein 
lies  the  aim  and  importance  of  science  ;  and  the  study 
of  things  as  they  exist  can  only  be  a  subject  for  science 
in  so  far  as  that  study  co-operates  towards  the  know- 
ledge of  how  men  should  live. 


MODERN  SCIENCE  229 

It  is  just  to  the  admission  of  its  bankruptcy  by  experi- 
mental science,  and  to  the  need  of  adopting  another 
method,  that  Carpenter  draws  attention  in  this  article. 

[1898.] 

Chapter  xx.  of  What  is  Art?  forms  a  companion  article 
to  the  above  essay.  They  were  both  written  at  the  same 
period  and  deal  with  the  same  topic. 


XVIII 

LETTER  TO  A  NON-COMMISSIONED  OFFICER 

You  are  surprised  that  soldiers  are  taught  that  it  is 
right  to  kill  people  in  certain  cases  and  in  war,  while 
in  the  books  admitted  to  be  holy  by  those  who  so  teach , 
there  is  nothing  like  such  a  permission,  but,  on  the 
contrary,  not  only  is  all  murder  forbidden  but  all  in- 
sulting of  others  is  forbidden  also,  and  we  are  told  not 
to  do  to  others  what  we  do  not  wish  done  to  us.  And 
you  ask,  Is  there  not  some  fraud  in  all  this  ?  And  if 
so,  then  for  whose  sake  is  it  committed  ? 

Yes,  there  is  a  fraud,  committed  for  the  sake  of  those 
accustomed  to  live  on  the  sweat  and  blood  of  other 
men,  and  who  therefore  have  perverted,  and  still  per- 
vert, Christ's  teaching,  given  to  man  for  his  good,  but 
which  has  now,  in  its  perverted  form,  become  a  chief 
source  of  human  misery. 

The  thing  has  come  about  in  this  way  : 

The  Government  and  all  those  of  the  upper  classes 
near  the  Government  who  live  by  other  people's  work, 
need  some  means  of  dominating  the  workers,  and  find 
this  means  in  the  control  of  the  army.  Defence 
against  foreign  enemies  is  only  an  excuse.  The 
German  Government  frightens  its  subjects  about  the 
Russians  and  the  French  ;  the  French  Government 
frightens  its  people  about  the  Germans ;  the  Russian 
Government  frightens  its  people  about  the  French  and 
the  Germans  ;  and  that  is  the  way  with  all  Governments. 
But  neither  Germans  nor  Russians  nor  Frenchmen 
idesire  to  fight  their  neighbours  or  other  people  ;  but, 
living  in  peace,  they  dread  war  more  than  anything 
[  230  ] 


TO  A  NON-COMMISSIONED  OFFICER    231 

else  in  the  world.  The  Government  and  the  upper, 
governing  classes,  to  excuse  their  domination  of  the 
labourers,  behave  like  a  gipsy  who  whips  his  horse 
before  he  turns  a  corner  and  then  pretends  he  cannot 
lold  it  in.  They  stir  up  their  own  people  and  some 
foreign  Government,  and  then  pretend  that  for  the 
well-being,  or  the  defence,  of  their  people  they  must 
declare  war :  which  again  brings  profit  only  to  generals, 
oficers,  officials,  merchants,  and,  in  general,  to  the 
rith.  In  reality  war  is  an  inevitable  result  of  the 
existence  of  armies  ;  and  armies  are  only  needed  by 
Governments  to  dominate  their  own  working  classes. 

The  thing  is  a  crime,  but  the  worst  of  it  is  that  the 
Government,  in  order  to  have  a  plausible  basis  for  its 
domination  of  the  people,  has  to  pretend  that  it  holds 
the  highest  religious  teaching  known  to  man  (the 
Christian),  and  that  it  brings  up  its  subjects  in  this 
teaching.  That  teaching,  however,  is  in  its  very  nature 
opoosed  not  only  to  murder  but  to  all  violence,  and 
therefore  the  Governments,  in  order  to  dominate  the 
people  and  to  be  considered  Christian,  had  to  pervert 
Christianity  and  to  hide  its  true  meaning  from  the 
people,  and  thus  deprive  men  of  the  well-being  Christ 
offered  them. 

This  perversion  was  accomplished  long  ago,  in  the 
time  of  that  scoundrel  the  Emperor  Constantine,  who 
fcr  doing  it  was  enrolled  among  the  saints.*  All  sub- 
sequent Governments,  especially  our  Russian  Govern- 
ment, do  their  utmost  to  preserve  this  perverted 
understanding,  and  to  prevent  people  from  seeing  the 
real  meaning  of  Christianity ;  because  having  once 
seen  the  real  meaning  of  Christianity,  the  people 
would  perceive  that  the  Governments,  with  their  taxes, 
soldiers,  prisons,  gallows,  and  false  priests,  are  not 
only  not  the  pillars  of  Christianity  they  profess  to  be, 
but  are  its  greatest  enemies. 

In  consequence  of  this  perversion,  those  frauds  which 

*  Constantine  the  Great  was  decreed  to  be  a  god  by  the 
Roman  Senate,  and  was  made  a  Christian  saint  by  the 
Eastern  Church. 


232  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

have  surprised  you  are  possible,  and  all  those  terrible 
misfortunes  occur  from  which  men  suffer. 

The  people  are  oppressed  and  robbed,  and  are  poor, 
ignorant,  dying  of  hunger.  Why  ?  Because  the  land 
is  in  the  hands  of  the  rich ;  and  the  people  are  en- 
slaved in  mills  and  in  factories,  obliged  to  earn  mone; 
because  taxes  are  demanded  from  them,  and  the  prica 
of  their  labour  is  diminished  while  the  price  of  things 
they  need  is  increased. 

How  are  they  to  escape  ?  By  taking  the  land  from  tie 
rich  ?  But  if  this  is  done,  soldiers  will  come,  and  will 
kill  the  rebels  or  put  them  in  prison.  Seize  the  mills 
and  factories  ?  The  same  will  happen.  Organize  aid 
maintain  a  strike?  It  is  sure  to  fail.  The  rich  will 
hold  out  longer  than  the  workers,  and  the  armies  are 
always  on  the  side  of  the  capitalists.  The  people  will 
never  extricate  themselves  from  the  want  in  whfch 
they  are  kept  as  long  as  the  army  is  in  the  hands  of 
the  governing  classes. 

But  who  compose  these  armies  that  keep  the  peojle 
in  this  state  of  slavery  ?  Who  are  these  soldiers  tlat 
will  fire  at  peasants  who  take  the  land,  or  at  strikers 
who  will  not  disperse,  or  at  smugglers  who  bring  in 
goods  without  paying  taxes  ?  Who  put  in  prison  and 
guard  there  those  who  refuse  to  pay  taxes  ?  The  soldiers 
are  these  same  peasants  who  are  deprived  of  land,  these 
same  strikers  who  want  better  wages,  these  same  tax- 
payers who  want  to  be  rid  of  these  taxes. 

And  why  do  these  people  shoot  at  their  brothers  ? 
Because  it  has  been  instilled  into  them  that  the  oath 
they  were  obliged  to  take  on  entering  the  service  is 
binding,  and  that  though  it  is  generally  wrong  to  kill 
people,  it  is  right  to  do  so  at  the  command  of  one's 
superiors.  That  is  to  say,  the  same  fraud  is  played 
off  upon  them  which  has  struck  you.  But  here  we 
meet  the  question,  How  is  it  that  sensible  people — 
often  people  who  can  read,  and  even  educated  people — 
believe  such  an  evident  lie  ?  However  little  education 
a  man  may  have,  he  cannot  but  know  that  Christ  did 
not  sanction  murder,  but  taught  kindness,  meekness, 


TO  A  NON-COMMISSIONED  OFFICER    233 

forgiveness  of  injuries,  love  of  one's  enemies ;  and 
therefore  he  cannot  help  seeing  that  on  the  basis  of 
Christian  teaching  he  cannot  pledge  himself  in  advance 
to  kill  all  whom  he  may  be  ordered  to  kill. 

The  question  is,  How  can  sensible  people  believe — as 
all  now  serving  in  the  army  have  believed  and  still 
believe — such  an  evident  falsehood?  The  answer  is 
that  it  is  not  this  one  fraud  by  itself  that  takes  people 
in,  but  they  have  from  childhood  been  deprived  of  the 
proper  use  of  their  reason  by  a  whole  series  of  decep- 
tions, a  whole  system  of  frauds,  called  the  Orthodox 
Faith,  which  is  nothing  but  the  grossest  idolatry.  In 
this  faith  people  are  taught :  that  God  is  triple,  that 
besides  this  triple  God  there  is  a  Queen  of  Heaven,* 
and  besides  this  Queen  there  are  various  saints  whose 
corpses  have  not  decayed, t  and  besides  these  saints 
there  are  icdnsj  of  the  Gods  and  of  the  Queen  of 
Heaven,  to  which  one  should  offer  candles  and  pray 
with  one's  hands  ;  and  that  the  most  important  and 
holy  thing  on  earth  is  the  pap§  which  the  priest  makes 
of  wine  and  white  bread  on  Sundays,  behind  a  parti- 
tion ;  and  that  after  the  priest  has  whispered  over  it, 

*  The  Holy  Virgin,  the  '  Mother  of  God  '  and  '  Queen  of 
Heaven,'  plays  a  prominent  part  in  the  Orthodox  Eastern 
Church. 

f  One  proof  of  holiness  adduced  as  justifying  admission 
to  the  rank  of  sainthood  is  the  non- decomposition  of  the 
holy  person's  corpse.  These  miraculously  preserved  bodies 
are  enshrined  in  chapels,  monasteries  and  cathedrals,  and 
are  there  visited  by  pilgrims,  who  offer  up  prayers  at  the 
shrine,  place  candles  before  it,  and  usually  leave  some 
contribution  for  the  benefit  of  the  establishment. 

X  The  icons  of  the  Eastern  Church  are  not  'graven 
images,'  but  are  pictures  painted  in* a  conventional  cada- 
verous manner  on  wood ;  these  are  often  covered  with  an 
embossed  metal  cover  allowing  only  the  hands  and  face  to 
be  seen,  and  making  the  icon  as  much  like  an  image  as  a 
picture. 

§  The  mixture  of  bread  and  wine  administered  by  the 
priests  of  the  Orthodox  Eastern  Church  at  the  celebration 
of  the  Eucharist. 


234  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

the  wine  is  no  longer  wine,  and  the  white  bread  is  not 
bread,  but  they  are  the  blood  and  flesh  of  one  of  the 
triple  Gods,  etc.  All  this  is  so  stupid  and  senseless 
that  it  is  quite  impossible  to  understand  what  it  all 
means.  And  the  very  people  who  teach  this  faith  do 
not  ask  you  to  understand  it,  but  only  tell  you  to 
believe  it ;  and  people  trained  to  believe  these  things 
from  childhood  can  believe  any  kind  of  nonsense  that 
is  told  them.  And  when  men  have  been  so  befooled 
that  they  believe  that  God  hangs  in  the  corner,*  or  sits 
in  a  morsel  of  pap  which  the  priest  gives  out  in  a 
spoon  ;  that  to  kiss  a  board  or  some  relic  and  put 
candles  in  front  of  them,  is  useful  for  life  here  and 
hereafter — they  are  next  called  on  to  enter  the  military 
service,  where  they  are  humbugged  to  any  extent ; 
being  first  made  to  swear  on  the  Gospel  (in  which 
swearing  is  prohibited)  that  they  will  do  just  what  is 
forbidden  in  those  Gospels,  and  then  taught  that  to  kill 
people  at  the  word  of  those  in  command  is  not  a  sin, 
but  that  to  refuse  to  obey  those  in  command  is  a  sin. 
So  that  the  fraud  played  off  on  soldiers  when  it  is 
instilled  into  them  that  they  may,  without  sin,  kill 
people  at  the  wish  of  those  in  command,  is  not  an 
isolated  fraud,  but  is  bound  up  with  a  whole  system  of 
deception  without  which  this  one  fraud  would  not 
deceive  them. 

Only  a  man  quite  befooled  by  the  false  faith  called 
Orthodoxy,  palmed  off  upon  him  for  true  Christian 
faith,  can  believe  that  it  is  no  sin  for  a  Christian  to 
enter  the  army,  promising  blindly  to  obey  any  man 
who  ranks  above  him  in  the  service,  and,  at  the  will  of 
others,  learning  to  kill,  and  committing  that  most 
terrible  crime  forbidden  by  all  moral  law. 

A  man  free  from  the  pseudo-Christian  faith  that  is 
called  Orthodoxy,  will  not  believe  that. 

And  that  is  why  the  so-called  Sectarians — Christians 

*  This  refers  to  the  common  practice  of  hanging  an  ic6n 
in  the  corner  of  each  dwelling-room.  These  icons  are  called 
'  g  ids, '  and  are  prayed  to  in  a  way  that  often  amounts  to 
idolatry. 


TO  A  NON-COMMISSIONED  OFFICER    235 

who  have  repudiated  the  Orthodox  teaching-,  and  ac- 
knowledge Christ's  teaching  as  explained  in  the  Gospels, 
and  especially  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount — are  not 
tricked  by  this  deception,  but  have  frequently  refused, 
and  still  do  refuse,  to  be  soldiers,  considering  such  an 
occupation  incompatible  with  Christianity,  and  pre- 
ferring to  bear  all  kinds  of  persecution,  as  hundreds 
and  thousands  of  people  are  doing :  in  Russia  many  of 
the  Doukhobdrs  and  Molokans ;  in  Austria  the  Naza- 
renes,  and  in  Sweden,  Switzerland,  and  Germany  some 
members  of  the  Evangelical  sects.  The  Government 
knows  this,  and  is  therefore  exceedingly  anxious  that 
the  general  Church  deception,  without  which  its  power 
could  not  be  maintained,  should  be  commenced  with 
every  child  from  early  infancy  and  be  continually 
maintained  in  such  a  way  that  none  may  escape  it. 
The  Government  tolerates  anything  else  :  drunkenness 
and  vice  (and  not  only  tolerates  but  even  organizes 
drunkenness  and  vice — they  help  to  stupefy  people), 
but  by  all  means  in  its  power  it  hinders  those  who 
have  escaped  out  of  its  trap  from  assisting  others  to 
escape. 

The  Russian  Government  perpetrates  this  fraud  with 
special  craft  and  cruelty.  It  orders  all  its  subjects  to 
baptize  their  children  during  infancy  into  the  false  faith 
called  Orthodoxy,  and  it  threatens  to  punish  them  if 
they  disobey.  And  when  the  children  are  baptized — 
that  is,  are  reckoned  as  Orthodox — then,  under  threats 
of  criminal  penalties,  they  are  forbidden  to  discuss  the 
faith  into  which,  without  their  wish,  they  were  baptized; 
and  for  such  discussion  of  that  faith,  as  well  as  for  re- 
nouncing it  and  changing  to  another,  they  are  actually 
punished.  So  that  it  cannot  be  said  of  Russians  in 
general  that  they  believe  the  Orthodox  Faith — they  do 
not  know  whether  they  believe  it  or  not.  They  were 
converted  to  it  during  infancy,  and  kept  in  it  by  violence 
— that  is,  by  the  fear  of  punishment.  All  Russians 
were  entrapped  into  Orthodoxy  by  cunning  fraud,  and 
are  kept  in  it  by  cruel  force. 

Using  the  power  it  wields,  the  Government  per- 


230  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

petrates  and  maintains  this  fraud,  and  by  means  of  it 
retains  power. 

And,  therefore,  the  sole  way  to  free  people  from 
their  many  miseries  lies  in  freeing  them  from  the  false 
faith  instilled  into  them  by  Government,  and  in  their 
imbibing  the  true  Christian  teaching,  which  this  false 
teaching  hides.  The  true  Christian  teaching  is  very 
simple,  clear,  and  obvious  to  all,  as  Christ  said.  But 
it  is  simple  and  accessible  only  when  man  is  freed  from 
that  falsehood  in  which  we  were  all  educated,  and 
which  is  passed  off  upon  us  as  God's  Truth. 

Nothing  useful  can  be  poured  into  a  vessel  that  is 
already  full  of  what  is  useless.  We  must  first  empty 
out  what  is  useless.  So  it  is  with  the  acquirement  of 
true  Christian  teaching.  We  have  first  to  understand 
that  all  the  stories  telling  how  God  made  the  world 
6,000  years  ago ;  how  Adam  sinned  and  the  human 
race  fell,  and  how  the  Son  of  God  (a  God  born  of  a 
virgin)  came  on  earth  and  redeemed  man  ;  and  all  the 
fables  in  the  Old  Testament  and  in  the  Gospels,  and  all 
the  lives  of  the  saints  with  their  stories  of  miracles  and 
relics — are  all  nothing  but  a  gross  hash  of  Jewish  super- 
stitions and  priestly  frauds.  Only  to  a  man  quite  free 
from  this  deception  can  the  clear  and  simple  teaching 
of  Christ,  which  needs  no  explanation,  be  accessible 
and  comprehensible.  That  teaching  tells  us  nothing  of 
the  beginning,  or  of  the  end,  of  the  world,  nor  about 
God  and  His  purpose,  nor,  in  general,  about  things 
which  we  cannot  and  need  not  know  ;  but  it  speaks  only 
of  what  man  must  do  to  save  himself — that  is,  how  best 
to  live  the  life  he  has  come  into,  in  this  world,  from 
birth  to  death.  For  that  purpose  it  is  only  necessary 
to  act  towards  others  as  we  wish  them  to  act  towards  us. 
In  that  is  all  the  law  and  the  prophets,  as  Christ  said. 
And  to  act  in  this  way  we  need  neither  icons,  nor  relics, 
nor  church  services,  nor  priests,  nor  catechisms,  nor 
Governments,  but,  on  the  contrary,  we  need  perfect 
freedom  from  all  that ;  for  to  do  to  others  as  we  wish 
them  to  do  to  us  is  only  possible  when  a  man  is  free 
from  the  fables  which  the  priests  give  out  as  the  only 


TO  A  NON-COMMISSIONED  OFFICER    237 

truth,  and  when  he  is  not  bound  by  promises  to  act  as 
other  people  may  order.  Only  such  a  man  will  be 
capable  of  fulfilling — not  his  own  will  nor  that  of 
other  men,  but — the  will  of  God. 

And  the  will  of  God  is  not  that  we  should  fight  and 
oppress  the  weak,  but  that  we  should  acknowledge  all 
men  to  be  our  brothers  and  should  serve  one  another. 

These  are  the  thoughts  your  letter  has  aroused  in  me. 
I  shall  be  very  glad  if  they  help  to  clear  up  the  ques- 
tions you  are  thinking  about. 

[1899.] 


XIX 

PATRIOTISM  AND  GOVERNMENT 

The  time  is  fast  approaching  when  to  call  a  man  a 
patriot  will  be  the  deepest  insult  you  can  offer  him. 
Patriotism  now  means  advocating  plunder  in  the  interests 
of  the  privileged  classes  of  the  particular  State  system  into 
which  we  have  happened  to  be  born.' — E.  Belfort  Bax. 


I  have*  already  several  times  expressed  the  thought 
that  in  our  day  the  feeling  of  patriotism  is  an  unnatural, 
irrational,  and  harmful  feeling,  and  a  cause  of  a  great 
part  of  the  ills  from  which  mankind  is  suffering  ;  and 
that,  consequently,  this  feeling  should  not  be  cultivated, 
as  is  now  being  done,  but  should,  on  the  contrary,  be 
suppressed  and  eradicated  by  all  means  available  to 
rational  men.  Yet,  strange  to  say — though  it  is  undeni- 
able that  the  universal  armaments  and  destructive  wars 
which  are  ruining  the  peoples  result  from  that  one 
feeling — all  my  arguments  showing  the  backwardness, 
anachronism,  and  harmfulness  of  patriotism  have  been 
met,  and  are  still  met,  either  by  silence,  by  intentional 
misinterpretation,  or  by  a  strange  unvarying  reply  to 
the  effect  that  only  bad  patriotism  (Jingoism,  or  Chau- 
vinism) is  evil,  but  that  real  good  patriotism  is  a  very 
elevated  moral  feeling,  to  condemn  which  is  not  only 
irrational  but  wicked. 

What  this  real,  good  patriotism  consists  in,  we  are 

never  told ;  or,  if  anything  is   said  about  it,  instead 

of  explanation  we   get  declamatory,  inflated  phrases, 

or,  finally,  some   other  conception   is  substituted  for 

r  238  1 


PATRIOTISM  AND  GOVERNMENT       239 

patriotism — something  which  has  nothing  in  common 
with  the  patriotism  we  all  know,  and  from  the  results 
of  which  we  all  suffer  so  severely. 

It  is  generally  said  that  the  real,  good  patriotism 
consists  in  desiring  for  one's  own  people  or  State  such 
real  benefits  as  do  not  infringe  the  well-being  of  other 
nations. 

Talking  recently  to  an  Englishman  about  the  present 
war,*  I  said  to  him  that  the  real  cause  of  the  war  was 
not  avarice,  as  people  generally  say,  but  patriotism,  as 
is  evident  from  the  temper  of  the  whole  of  English 
society.  The  Englishman  did  not  agree  with  me,  and 
said  that  even  were  the  case  so,  it  resulted  from  the  fact 
that  the  patriotism  at  present  inspiring  Englishmen  is 
a  bad  patriotism  ;  but  that  good  patriotism,  such  as  he 
was  imbued  with,  would  cause  Englishmen,  his  com- 
patriots, to  act  well. 

1  Then  do  you  wish  only  Englishmen  to  act  well  ?' 
I  asked. 

6 1  wish  all  men  to  do  so/  said  he  ;  indicating  clearly 
by  that  reply  the  characteristic  of  true  benefits — 
whether  moral,  scientific,  or  even  material  and  practical 
— which  is  that  they  spread  out  to  all  men.  But,  evi- 
dently, to  wish  such  benefits  to  everyone,  not  only  is 
not  patriotic,  but  is  the  reverse  of  patriotic. 

Neither  do  the  peculiarities  of  each  people  constitute 
patriotism,  though  these  things  are  purposely  substi- 
tuted for  the  conception  of  patriotism  by  its  defenders. 
They  say  that  the  peculiarities  of  each  people  are 
an  essential  condition  of  human  progress,  and  that 
patriotism,  which  seeks  to  maintain  those  peculiarities, 
is,  therefore,  a  good  and  useful  feeling.  But  is  it  not 
quite  evident  that  if,  once  upon  a  time,  these  peculiari- 
ties of  each  people — these  customs,  creeds,  languages — 
were  conditions  necessary  for  the  life  of  humanity,  in 
our  time  these  same  peculiarities  form  the  chief  obstacle 
to  what  is  already  recognised  as  an  ideal—  the  brotherly 
union  of  the  peoples  ?  And  therefore  the  maintenance 
and  defence  of  any  nationality — Russian,  German, 
*  That  is,  the  South  African  War  of  1899-1902. 


240  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

French,  or  Anglo-Saxon,  provoking  the  corresponding 
maintenance  and  defence  not  only  of  Hungarian, 
Polish,  and  Irish  nationalities,  but  also  of  Basque, 
Provencal,  Mordva,*  Tchouvash,  and  many  other 
nationalities — serves  not  to  harmonize  and  unite  men, 
but  to  estrange  and  divide  them  more  and  more  from 
one  another. 

So  that  not  the  imaginary  but  the  real  patriotism, 
which  we  all  know,  by  which  most  people  to-dav  are 
swayed  and  from  which  humanity  suffers  so  severely,  is 
not  the  wish  for  spiritual  benefits  for  one's  own  people 
(it  is  impossible  to  desire  spiritual  benefits  for  one's 
own  people  only),  but  is  a  very  definite  feeling  of 
preference  for  one's  own  people  or  State  above  all 
other  peoples  and  States,  and  a  consequent  wish  to  get 
for  that  people  or  State  the  greatest  advantages  and 
power  that  can  be  got — things  which  are  obtainable 
only  at  the  expense  of  the  advantages  and  power  of 
other  peoples  or  States. 

It  would,  therefore,  seem  obvious  that  patriotism  as 
a  feeling  is  bad  and  harmful,  and  as  a  doctrine  is  stupid. 
For  it  is  clear  that  if  each  people  and  each  State  con- 
siders itself  the  best  of  peoples  and  States,  they  all 
live  in  a  gross  and  harmful  delusion. 


One  would  expect  the  harmfulness  and  irrationality 
of  patriotism  to  be  evident  to  everybody.  But  the 
surprising  fact  is  that  cultured  and  learned  men  not 
only  do  not  themselves  notice  the  harm  and  stupidity 
of  patriotism,  but  they  resist  every  exposure  of  it 
with  the  greatest  obstinacy  and  ardour  (though  without 
any  rational  grounds),  and  continue  to  belaud  it  as 
beneficent  and  elevating. 

What  does  this  mean  ? 

*  The  Mordva  (or  Mordvinian)  and  Tchouvash  tribes  are 
of  Finnish  origin,  and  inhabit  chiefly  the  governments  of 
the  Middle  Volga. 


PATRIOTISM  AND  GOVERNMENT       241 

Only  one  explanation  of  this  amazing  fact  presents 
itself  to  me. 

All  human  history,  from  the  earliest  times  to  our 
own  day,  may  be  considered  as  a  movement  of  the  con- 
sciousness, both  of  individuals  and  of  homogeneous 
groups,  from  lower  ideas  to  higher  ones. 

The  whole  path  travelled  both  by  individuals  and  by 
homogeneous  groups  may  be  represented  as  a  consecu- 
tive flight  of  steps  from  the  lowest,  on  the  level  of 
animal  life,  to  the  highest  attained  by  the  conscious- 
ness of  man  at  a  given  moment  of  history. 

Each  man,  like  each  separate  homogeneous  group, 
nation,  or  State,  always  moved  and  moves  up  this 
ladder  of  ideas.  Some  portions  of  humanity  are  in 
front,  others  lag  far  behind,  others,  again  —  the 
majority — move  somewhere  between  the  most  advanced 
and  the  most  backward.  But  all,  whatever  stage  they 
may  have  reached,  are  inevitably  and  irresistibly  moving 
from  lower  to  higher  ideas.  And  always,  at  any  given 
moment,  both  the  individuals  and  the  separate  groups 
of  people — advanced,  middle,  or  backward — stand  in 
three  different  relations  to  the  three  stages  of  ideas 
amid  which  they  move. 

Always,  both  for  the  individual  and  for  the  separate 
groups  of  people,  there  are  the  ideas  of  the  past,  which 
are  worn  out  and  have  become  strange  to  them,  and 
to  which  they  cannot  revert :  as,  for  instance,  in  our 
Christian  world,  the  ideas  of  cannibalism,  universal 
plunder,  the  rape  of  wives,  and  other  customs  of  which 
only  a  record  remains. 

And  there  are  the  ideas  of  the  present,  instilled  into 
men's  minds  by  education,  by  example,  and  by  the 
general  activity  of  all  around  them  ;  ideas  under  the 
power  of  which  they  live  at  a  given  time  :  for  instance, 
in  our  own  day,  the  ideas  of  property,  State  organiza- 
tion, trade,  utilization  of  domestic  animals,  etc. 

And  there  are  the  ideas  of  the  future,  of  which  some 
are  already  approaching  realization  and  are  obliging 
people  to  change  their  way  of  life  and  to  struggle 
against  the  former  ways :  such  ideas  in  our  world  as 

o 


242  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

those  of  freeing*  the  labourers,  of  giving  equality  to 
women,  of  disusing  flesh  food,  etc.  ;  while  others, 
though  already  recognised,  have  not  yet  come  into 
practical  conflict  with  the  old  forms  of  life  :  such  in 
our  times  are  the  ideas  (which  we  call  ideals)  of  the 
extermination  of  violence,  the  arrangement  of  a  com- 
munal system  of  property,  of  a  universal  religion,  and 
of  a  general  brotherhood  of  men. 

And,  therefore,  every  man  and  every  homogeneous 
group  of  men,  on  whatever  level  they  may  stand, 
having  behind  them  the  worn-out  remembrances  of  the 
past,  and  before  them  the  ideals  of  the  future,  are 
always  in  a  state  of  struggle  between  the  moribund 
ideas  of  the  present  and  the  ideas  of  the  future  that 
are  coming  to  life.  It  usually  happens  that  when  an 
idea  which  has  been  useful  and  even  necessary  in  the 
past  becomes  superfluous,  that  idea,  after  a  more  or  less 
prolonged  struggle,  yields  its  place  to  a  new  idea 
which  was  till  then  an  ideal,  but  which  thus  becomes 
a  present  idea. 

But  it  does  occur  that  an  antiquated  idea,  already 
replaced  in  people's  consciousness  by  a  higher  one,  is  of 
such  a  kind  that  its  maintenance  is  profitable  to  those 
people  who  have  the  greatest  influence  in  their  society. 
And  then  it  happens  that  this  antiquated  idea,  though 
it  is  in  sharp  contradiction  to  the  whole  surrounding 
form  of  life,  which  has  been  altering  in  other  respects, 
continues  to  influence  people  and  to  sway  their  actions. 
Such  retention  of  antiquated  ideas  always  has  occurred, 
and  still  does  occur,  in  the  region  of  religion.  The 
cause  is,  that  the  priests,  whose  profitable  positions  are 
bound  up  with  the  antiquated  religious  idea,  purposely 
use  their  power  to  hold  people  to  this  antiquated  idea. 

The  same  thing  occurs,  and  for  similar  reasons,  in  the 
political  sphere,  with  reference  to  the  patriotic  idea,  on 
which  all  arbitrary  power  is  based.  People  to  whom  it 
is  profitable  to  do  so,  maintain  that  idea  by  artificial 
means,  though  it  now  lacks  both  sense  and  utility. 
And  as  these  people  possess  the  most  powerful  means  of 
influencing  others,  they  are  able  to  achieve  their  object. 


PATRIOTISM  AND  GOVERNMENT        243 

In  this,  it  seems  to  me,  lies  the  explanation  of  the 
strange  contrast  between  the  antiquated  patriotic  idea, 
and  that  whole  drift  of  ideas  making  in  a  contrary  direc- 
tion, which  have  already  entered  into  the  consciousness 
of  the  Christian  world. 


in. 

Patriotism,  as  a  feeling  of  exclusive  love  for  one's 
own  people,  and  as  a  doctrine  of  the  virtue  of  sacrificing 
one's  tranquillity,  one's  property,  and  even  one's  life,  in 
defence  of  one's  own  people  from  slaughter  and  outrage 
by  their  enemies,  was  the  highest  idea  of  the  period 
when  each  nation  considered  it  feasible  and  just,  for  its 
own  advantage,  to  subject  to  slaughter  and  outrage  the 
people  of  other  nations. 

But,  already  some  2,000  years  ago,  humanity, 
in  the  person  of  the  highest  representatives  of  its 
wisdom,  began  to  recognise  the  higher  idea  of  a 
brotherhood  of  man  ;  and  that  idea,  penetrating  man's 
consciousness  more  and  more,  has  in  our  time  attained 
most  varied  forms  of  realization.  Thanks  to  improved 
means  of  communication,  and  to  the  unity  of  industry, 
of  trade,  of  the  arts,  and  of  science,  men  are  to-day  so 
bound  one  to  another  that  the  danger  of  conquest, 
massacre,  or  outrage  by  a  neighbouring  people,  has 
quite  disappeared,  and  all  peoples  (the  peoples,  but  not 
the  Governments)  live  together  in  peaceful,  mutually 
advantageous,  and  friendly  commercial,  industrial, 
artistic,  and  scientific  relations,  which  they  have  no 
need  and  no  desire  to  disturb.  One  would  think, 
therefore,  that  the  antiquated  feeling  of  patriotism — 
being  superfluous  and  incompatible  with  the  conscious- 
ness we  have  reached  of  the  existence  of  brotherhood 
among  men  of  different  nationalities — should  dwindle 
more  and  more  until  it  completely  disappears.  Yet 
the  very  opposite  of  this  occurs  :  this  harmful  and  anti- 
quated feeling  not  only  continues  to  exist,  but  burns 
more  and  more  fiercely. 

q  2 


244  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

The  peoples,  without  any  reasonable  ground,  and 
contrary  alike  to  their  conception  of  right  and  to  their 
own  advantage,  not  only  sympathize  with  Governments 
in  their  attacks  on  other  nations,  in  their  seizures  of 
foreign  possessions,  and  in  defending  by  force  what 
they  have  already  stolen,  but  even  themselves  demand 
such  attacks,  seizures,  and  defences  :  are  glad  of  them, 
and  take  pride  in  them.  The  small  oppressed  nation- 
alities which  have  fallen  under  the  power  of  the  great 
States — the  Poles,  Irish,  Bohemians,  Finns,  or  Arme- 
nians— resenting  the  patriotism  of  their  conquerors, 
which  is  the  cause  of  their  oppression,  catch  from  them 
the  infection  of  this  feeling  of  patriotism — which  has 
ceased  to  be  necessary,  and  is  now  obsolete,  unmean- 
ing, and  harmful — and  catch  it  to  such  a  degree  that 
all  their  activity  is  concentrated  upon  it,  and  they, 
themselves  suffering  from  the  patriotism  of  the  stronger 
nations,  are  ready,  for  the  sake  of  patriotism,  to  per- 
petrate on  other  peoples  the  very  same  deeds  that  their 
oppressors  have  perpetrated  and  are  perpetrating  on 
them. 

This  occurs  because  the  ruling  classes  (including  not 
only  the  actual  rulers  with  their  officials,  but  all  the 
classes  who  enjoy  an  exceptionally  advantageous  posi- 
tion :  the  capitalists,  journalists,  and  most  of  the  artists 
and  scientists)  can  retain  their  position — exceptionally 
advantageous  in  comparison  with  that  of  the  labouring 
masses — thanks  only  to  the  Government  organization, 
which  rests  on  patriotism.  They  have  in  their  hands 
all  the  most  powerful  means  of  influencing  the  people, 
and  always  sedulously  support  patriotic  feelings  in  them- 
selves and  in  others,  more  especially  as  those  feelings 
which  uphold  the  Government's  power  are  those  that 
are  always  best  rewarded  by  that  power. 

Every  official  prospers  the  more  in  his  career,  the 
more  patriotic  he  is  ;  so  also  the  army  man  gets  promo- 
tion in  time  of  war — the  war  is  produced  by  patriotism. 

Patriotism  and  its  result — wars — give  an  enormous 
revenue  to  the  newspaper  trade,  and  profits  to  many 
other  trades.     Every  writer,  teacher,  and  professor  is 


PATRIOTISM  AND  GOVERNMENT       245 

more  secure  in  his  place  the  more  he  preaches  patriot- 
ism. Every  Emperor  and  King  obtains  the  more  fame 
the  more  he  is  addicted  to  patriotism. 

The  ruling  classes  have  in  their  hands  the  army, 
money,  the  schools,  the  churches,  and  the  press.  In 
the  schools  they  kindle  patriotism  in  the  children  by 
means  of  histories  describing  their  own  people  as  the 
best  of  all  peoples  and  always  in  the  right.  Among 
adults  they  kindle  [  it  by  spectacles,  jubilees,  monu- 
ments, and  by  a  lying  patriotic  press.  Above  all,  they 
inflame  patriotism  in  this  way  :  perpetrating  every  kind 
of  injustice  and  harshness  against  other  nations,  they 
provoke  in  them  enmity  towards  their  own  people, 
and  then  in  turn  exploit  that  enmity  to  embitter  their 
people  against  the  foreigner. 

The  intensification  of  this  terrible  feeling  of  patriot- 
ism has  gone  on  among  the  European  peoples  in  a 
rapidly  increasing  progression,  and  in  our  time  has 
reached  the  utmost  limits,  beyond  which  there  is  no 
room  for  it  to  extend. 


Within  the  memory  of  people  not  yet  old,  an  occur- 
rence took  place  showing  most  obviously  the  amazing 
intoxication  caused  by  patriotism  among  the  people  of 
Christendom. 

The  ruling  classes  of  Germany  excited  the  patriotism 
of  the  masses  of  their  people  to  such  a  degree  that,  in 
the  second  half  of  the  nineteenth  century,  a  law  was 
proposed  in  accordance  with  which  all  the  men  had  to 
become  soldiers  :  all  the  sons,  husbands,  fathers,  learned 
men,  and  godly  men,  had  to  learn  to  murder,  to  become 
submissive  slaves  of  those  above  them  in  military  rank, 
and  be  absolutely  ready  to  kill  whomsoever  they  were 
ordered  to  kill ;  to  kill  men  of  oppressed  nationalities, 
and  their  own  working-men  standing  up  for  their  rights, 
and  even  their  own  fathers  and  brothers — as  was  pub- 
licly proclaimed  by  that  most  impudent  of  potentates, 
William  II. 


246  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

That  horrible  measure,  outraging  all  man's  best  feel- 
ings in  the  grossest  manner,  was,  under  the  influence 
of  patriotism,  acquiesced  in  without  murmur  by  the 
people  of  Germany.  It  resulted  in  their  victory  over 
the  French.  That  victory  yet  further  excited  the 
patriotism  of  Germany,  and,  by  reaction,  that  of  France, 
Russia,  and  the  other  Powers ;  and  the  men  of  the 
European  countries  unresistingly  submitted  to  the  in- 
troduction of  general  military  service — i.e.,  to  a  state 
of  slavery  involving  a  degree  of  humiliation  and  sub- 
mission incomparably  worse  than  any  slavery  of  the 
ancient  world.  After  this  servile  submission  of  the 
masses  to  the  calls  of  patriotism,  the  audacity,  cruelty, 
and  insanity  of  the  Governments  knew  no  bounds.  A 
competition  in  the  usurpation  of  other  peoples'  lands 
in  Asia,  Africa,  and  America  began — evoked  partly  by 
whim,  partly  by  vanity,  and  partly  by  covetousness — 
and  was  accompanied  by  ever  greater  and  greater 
distrust  and  enmity  between  the  Governments. 

The  destruction  of  the  inhabitants  on  the  lands 
seized  was  accepted  as  a  quite  natural  proceeding.  The 
only  question  was,  who  should  be  first  in  seizing 
other  peoples'  land  and  destroying  the  inhabitants? 
All  the  Governments  not  only  most  evidently  infringed, 
and  are  infringing,  the  elementary  demands  of  justice 
in  relation  to  the  conquered  peoples,  and  in  relation  to 
one  another,  but  they  were  guilty,  and  continue  to  be 
guilty,  of  every  kind  of  cheating,  swindling,  bribing, 
fraud,  spying,  robbery,  and  murder ;  and  the  peoples 
not  only  sympathized,  and  still  sympathize,  with  them 
in  all  this,  but  they  rejoice  when  it  is  their  own  Govern- 
ment and  not  another  Government  that  commits  such 
crimes. 

The  mutual  enmity  between  the  different  peoples  and 
States  has  reached  latterly  such  amazing  dimensions 
that,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  there  is  no  reason 
why  one  State  should  attack  another,  everyone  knows 
that  all  the  Governments  stand  with  their  claws  out 
and  showing  their  teeth,  and  only  waiting  for  someone 


PATRIOTISM  AND  GOVERNMENT        247 

to  be  in  trouble,  or  become  weak,  in  order  to  tear  him 
to  pieoes  with  as  little  risk  as  possible. 

All  the  peoples  of  the  so-called  Christian  world 
have  been  reduced  by  patriotism  to  such  a  state  of 
brutality,  that  not  only  those  who  are  obliged  to  kill  or 
be  killed  desire  slaughter  and  rejoice  in  murder,  but  all 
the  people  of  Europe  and  America,  living  peaceably  in 
their  homes  exposed  to  no  danger,  are,  at  each  war — 
thanks  to  easy  means  of  communication  and  to  the 
press — in  the  position  of  the  spectators  in  a  Roman 
circus,  and,  like  them,  delight  in  the  slaughter,  and 
raise  the  bloodthirsty  cry,  'Pollice  verso.3* 

Not  adults  only,  but  also  children,  pure,  wise  chil- 
dren, rejoice,  according  to  their  nationality,  when 
they  hear  that  the  number  killed  and  lacerated  by 
lyddite  or  other  shells  on  some  particular  day  was  not 
700  but  1,000  Englishmen  or  Boers. 

And  parents  (I  know  such  cases)  encourage  their 
children  in  such  brutality. 

But  that  is  not  all.  Every  increase  in  the  army  of 
one  nation  (and  each  nation,  being  in  danger,  seeks  to 
increase  its  army  for  patriotic  reasons)  obliges  its  neigh- 
bours to  increase  their  armies,  also  from  patriotism,  and 
this  evokes  a  fresh  increase  by  the  first  nation. 

And  the  same  thing  occurs  with  fortifications  and 
navies :  one  State  has  built  ten  ironclads,  a  neighbour 
builds  eleven  ;  then  the  first  builds  twelve,  and  so  on 
to  infinity. 

' I'll  pinch  you.'  '  And  I'll  punch  your  head.'  '  And 
111  stab  you  with  a  dagger.'  '  And  I'll  bludgeon  you.' 
6  And  Til  shoot  you.'  .  .  .  Only  bad  children,  drunken 
men,  or  animals,  quarrel  or  fight  so,  but  yet  it  is  just 
what  is  going  on  among  the  highest  representatives  of 
the  most  enlightened  Governments,  the  very  men  who 
undertake  to  direct  the  education  and  the  morality  of 
their  subjects. 

*  Pollice  verso  ( '  thumb  down ')  was  the  sign  given  in 
the  Roman  amphitheatres  by  the  spectators  who  wished  a 
defeated  gladiator  to  be  slain. 


248  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 


The  position  is  becoming  worse  and  worse,  and  there 
is  no  stopping  this  descent  towards  evident  perdition. 

The  one  way  of  escape  believed  in  by  credulous 
people  has  now  been  closed  by  recent  events.  I  refer 
to  the  Hague  Conference,  and  to  the  war  between 
England  and  the  Transvaal  which  immediately  fol- 
lowed it. 

If  people  who  think  little,  or  but  superficially,  were 
able  to  comfort  themselves  with  the  idea  that  inter- 
national courts  of  arbitration  would  supersede  wars  and 
ever-increasing  armaments,  the  Hague  Conference  and 
the  war  that  followed  it  demonstrated  in  the  most 
palpable  manner  the  impossibility  of  finding  a  solution 
of  the  difficulty  in  that  way.  After  the  Hague  Confer- 
ence, it  became  obvious  that  as  long  as  Governments 
with  armies  exist,  the  termination  of  armaments  and  of 
wars  is  impossible.  That  an  agreement  should  become 
possible,  it  is  necessary  that  the  parties  to  it  should 
trust  each  other.  And  in  order  that  the  Powers  should 
trust  each  other,  they  must  lay  down  their  arms,  as  is 
done  by  the  bearers  of  a  flag  of  truce  when  they  meet 
for  a  conference. 

So  long  as  Governments,  distrusting  one  another,  not 
only  do  not  disband  or  decrease  their  armies,  but'always 
increase  them  in  correspondence  with  augmentations 
made  by  their  neighbours,  and  by  means  of  spies  watch 
every  movement  of  troops,  knowing  that  each  of  the 
Powers  will  attack  its  neighbour  as  soon  as  it  sees  its 
way  to  do  so,  no  agreement  is  possible,  and  every  con- 
ference is  either  a  stupidity,  or  a  pastime,  or  a  fraud,  or 
an  impertinence,  or  all  of  these  together. 

It  was  particularly  becoming  for  the  Russian  rather 
than  any  other  Government  to  be  the  enfant  terrible  of 
the  Hague  Conference.  No  one  at  home  being  allowed 
to  reply  to  all  its  evidently  mendacious  manifestations 
and  rescripts,  the  Russian  Government  is  so  spoilt,  that 
— having  without  the  least  scruple  ruined  its  own  people 
with  armaments,  strangled  Poland,  plundered  Turkestan 


PATRIOTISM  AND  GOVERNMENT        249 

and  China,  and  being  specially  engaged  in  suffocating 
Finland — it  proposed  disarmament  to  the  Governments, 
in  full  assurance  that  it  would  be  trusted ! 

But  strange,  unexpected,  and  indecent  as  such  a  pro- 
posal was— especially  at  the  very  time  when  orders  were 
being  given  to  increase  its  army — the  words  publicly 
uttered  in  the  hearing  of  the  people  were  such,  that  for 
the  sake  of  appearances  the  Governments  of  the  other 
Powers  could  not  decline  the  comical  and  evidently 
insincere  consultation  ;  and  so  the  delegates  met — know- 
ing in  advance  that  nothing  would  come  of  it — and  for 
several  weeks  (during  which  they  drew  good  salaries) 
though  they  were  laughing  in  their  sleeves,  they  all 
conscientiously  pretended  to  be  much  occupied  in 
arranging  peace  among  the  nations. 

The  Hague  Conference,  followed  up  as  it  was  by  the 
terrible  bloodshed  of  the  Transvaal  War,  which  no  one 
attempted,  or  is  now  attempting,  to  stop,  was,  never- 
theless, of  some  use,  though  not  at  all  in  the  way 
expected  of  it — it  was  useful  because  it  showed  in  the 
most  obvious  manner  that  the  evils  from  which  the 
peoples  are  suffering  cannot  be  cured  by  Governments. 
That  Governments,  even  if  they  wished  to,  can  ter- 
minate neither  armaments  nor  wars. 

Governments,  to  have  a  reason  for  existing,  must 
defend  their  people  from  other  people's  attack.  But 
not  one  people  wishes  to  attack,  or  does  attack,  another. 
And  therefore  Governments,  far  from  wishing  for  peace, 
carefully  excite  the  anger  of  other  nations  against  them- 
selves. And  having  excited  other  people's  anger  against 
themselves,  and  stirred  up  the  patriotism  of  their  own 
people,  each  Government  then  assures  its  people  that  it 
is  in  danger  and  must  be  defended. 

And  having  the  power  in  their  hands,  the  Govern- 
ments can  both  irritate  other  nations  and  excite 
patriotism  at  home,  and  they  carefully  do  both  the 
one  and  the  other ;  nor  can  they  act  otherwise,  for 
their  existence  depends  on  thus  acting. 

If,  in  former  times,  Governments  were  necessary  to 
defend  their  people  from  other  people's  attacks,  now, 


250  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

on  the  contrary,  Governments  artificially  disturb  the 
peace  that  exists  between  the  nations,  and  provoke 
enmity  among  them. 

When  it  was  necessary  to  plough  in  order  to  sow, 
ploughing  was  wise  ;  but  evidently  it  is  absurd  and 
harmful  to  go  on  ploughing  after  the  seed  has  been 
sown.  But  this  is  just  what  the  Governments  are 
obliging  their  people  to  do :  to  infringe  the  unity 
which  exists,  and  which  nothing  would  infringe  if  it 
were  not  for  the  Governments. 


In  reality  what  are  these  Governments,  without  which 
people  think  they  could  not  exist  ? 

There  may  have  been  a  time  when  such  Governments 
were  necessary,  and  when  the  evil  of  supporting"  a 
Government  was  less  than  that  of  being  defenceless 
against  organized  neighbours  ;  but  now  such  Govern- 
ments have  become  unnecessary,  and  are  a  far  greater 
evil  than  all  the  dangers  with  which  they  frighten  their 
subjects. 

Not  only  military  Governments,  but  Governments  in 
general,  could  be,  I  will  not  say  useful,  but  at  least 
harmless,  only  if  they  consisted  of  immaculate,  holy 
people,  as  is  theoretically  the  case  among  the  Chinese. 
But  then  Governments,  by  the  nature  of  their  activity, 
which  consists  in  committing  acts  of  violence,*  are 
always  composed  of  elements  the  most  contrary  to 
holiness — of  the  most  audacious,  unscrupulous,  and 
perverted  people. 

A  Government,  therefore,  and  especially  a  Govern- 
ment entrusted  with  military  power,  is  the  most 
dangerous  organization  possible. 

*  The  word  government  is  frequently  used  in  an  indefinite 
sense  as  almost  equivalent  to  management  or  direction  ; 
but  in  the  sense  in  which  the  word  is  used  in  the  present 
article,  the  characteristic  feature  of  a  Government  is  that 
it  claims  a  moral  right  to  inflict  physical  penalties,  and  by 
its  decree  to  make  murder  a  good  action. 


PATRIOTISM  AND  GOVERNMENT        251 

The  Government,  in  the  widest  sense,  including 
capitalists  and  the  Press,  is  nothing  else  than  an 
organization  which  places  the  greater  part  of  the 
people  in  the  power  of  a  smaller  part,  who  dominate 
them  ;  that  smaller  part  is  subject  to  a  yet  smaller 
part,  and  that  again  to  a  yet  smaller,  and  so  on,  reach- 
ing at  last  a  few  people,  or  one  single  man,  who  by 
means  of  military  force  has  power  over  all  the  rest.  So 
that  all  this  organization  resembles  a  cone,  of  which  all 
the  parts  are  completely  in  the  power  of  those  people, 
or  of  that  one  person,  who  happen  to  be  at  the  apex. 

The  apex  of  the  cone  is  seized  by  those  who  are  more 
cunning,  audacious,  and  unscrupulous  than  the  rest,  or 
by  someone  who  happens  to  be  the  heir  of  those  who 
were  audacious  and  unscrupulous. 

To-day  it  may  be  Boris  Godundf,*  and  to-morrow 
Gregory  Otrepyef.t  To-day  the  licentious  Catherine, 
who  with  her  paramours  has  murdered  her  husband ; 
to-morrow  Pougatchef  ;J  then  Paul  the  madman, 
Nicholas  I.,  or  Alexander  III. 

To-day  it  may  be  Napoleon,  to-morrow  a  Bourbon  or 
an  Orleans,  a  Boulanger  or  a  Panama  Company ;  to- 
day it  may  be  Gladstone,  to-morrow  Salisbury,  Cham- 
berlain, or  Rhodes. 

And  to  such  Governments  is  allowed  full  power,  not 
only  over  property  and  lives,  but  even  over  the  spiritual 
and  moral  development,  the  education,  and  the  religious 
guidance  of  everybody. 

People  construct  such  a  terrible  machine  of  power, 
they  allow  any  one  to  seize  it  who  can  (and  the  chances 
always  are  that  it  will  be  seized  by  the  most  morally 
worthless) — they  slavishly  submit  to  him,  and  are  then 

*  Boris  Godun6f,  brother-in-law  of  the  weak  Tsar  Fyodor 
Ivanovitch,  succeeded  in  becoming  Tsar,  and  reigned  in 
Moscow  from  1598  to  1605. 

t  Gregory  Otrepyef  was  a  pretender  who,  passing  himself 
off  as  Dimitry,  son  of  Ivan  the  Terrible,  reigned  in  Moscow 
in  1605  and  1606. 

X  Pougatchef  was  the  leader  of  a  most  formidable  insur- 
rection in  1773-1775,  and  was  executed  in  Moscow  in  1775. 


252  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

surprised  that  evil  comes  of  it.  They  are  afraid  of 
Anarchists'  bombs,  and  are  not  afraid  of  this  terrible 
organization  which  is  always  threatening  them  with  the 
greatest  calamities. 

People  found  it  useful  to  tie  themselves  together  in 
order  to  resist  their  enemies,  as  the  Circassians*  did 
when  resisting  attacks.  But  the  danger  is  quite  past, 
and  yet  people  go  on  tying  themselves  together. 

They  carefully  tie  themselves  up  so  that  one  man 
can  have  them  all  at  his  mercy  ;  then  they  throw  away 
the  end  of  the  rope  that  ties  them,  and  leave  it  trailing 
for  some  rascal  or  fool  to  seize  and  to  do  them  whatever 
harm  he  likes. 

Really,  what  are  people  doing  but  just  that — when 
they  set  up,  submit  to,  and  maintain  an  organized  and 
military  Government  ? 


To  deliver  men  from  the  terrible  and  ever-increasing 
evils  of  armaments  and  wars,  we  want  neither  con- 
gresses nor  conferences,  nor  treaties,  nor  courts  of 
arbitration,  but  the  destruction  of  those  instruments  of 
violence  which  are  called  Governments,  and  from  which 
humanity's  greatest  evils  flow. 

To  destroy  Governmental  violence,  only  one  thing 
is  needed  :  it  is  that  people  should  understand  that  the 
feeling  of  patriotism,  which  alone  supports  that  instru- 
ment of  violence,  is  a  rude,  harmful,  disgraceful,  and 
bad  feeling,  and,  above  all,  is  immoral.  It  is  a  rude 
feeling,  because  it  is  one  natural  only  to  people  stand- 
ing on  the  lowest  level  of  morality,  and  expecting  from 
other  nations  such  outrages  as  they  themselves  are 
ready  to  inflict ;  it  is  a  harmful  feeling,  because  it 
disturbs  advantageous  and  joyous,  peaceful  relations 
with  other  peoples,  and  above  all  produces  that  Govern- 
mental organisation  under  which  power  may  fall,  and 

*  The  Circassians,  when  surrounded,  used  to  tie  them- 
selves together  leg  to  leg,  that  none  might  escape,  but  all 
die  fighting.  Instances  of  this  kind  occurred  when  their 
country  was  being  annexed  by  Russia. 


PATRIOTISM  AND  GOVERNMENT       253 

does  fall,  into  the  hands  of  the  worst  men  ;  it  is  a  dis- 
graceful feeling,  because  it  turns  man  not  merely  into 
a  slave,  but  into  a  fighting  cock,  a  bull,  or  a  gladiator, 
who  wastes  his  strength  and  his  life  for  objects  which 
are  not  his  own  but  his  Governments' ;  and  it  is  an 
immoral  feeling,  because,  instead  of  confessing  one's  self 
a  son  of  God  (as  Christianity  teaches  us)  or  even  a  free 
man  guided  by  his  own  reason,  each  man  under  the 
influence  of  patriotism  confesses  himself  the  son  of  his 
fatherland  and  the  slave  of  his  Government,  and  com- 
mits actions  contrary  to  his  reason  and  his  conscience. 

It  is  only  necessary  that  people  should  understand 
this,  and  the  terrible  bond,  called  Government,  by 
which  we  are  chained  together,  will  fall  to  pieces  of 
itself  without  struggle ;  and  with  it  will  cease  the 
terrible  and  useless  evils  it  produces. 

And  people  are  already  beginning  to  understand  this. 
This,  for  instance,  is  what  a  citizen  of  the  United  States 
writes  : 

6  We  are  farmers,  mechanics,  merchants,  manufac- 
turers, teachers,  and  all  we  ask  is  the  privilege  of 
attending  to  our  own  business.  We  own  our  homes, 
love  our  friends,  are  devoted  to  our  families,  and  do 
not  interfere  with  our  neighbours — we  have  work  to 
do,  and  wish  to  work. 

'  Leave  us  alone  ! 

'But  they  will  not — these  politicians.  They  insist 
on  governing  us  and  living  off  our  labour.  They  tax 
us,  eat  our  substance,  conscript  us,  draft  our  boys  into 
their  wars.  All  the  myriads  of  men  who  live  off  the 
Government  depend  upon  the  Government  to  tax  us, 
and,  in  order  to  tax  us  successfully,  standing  armies  are 
maintained.  The  plea  that  the  army  is  needed  for  the 
protection  of  the  country  is  pure  fraud  and  pretence. 
The  French  Government  affrights  the  people  by  telling 
them  that  the  Germans  are  ready  and  anxious  to  fall 
upon  them  ;  the  Russians  fear  the  British  ;  the  British 
fear  everybody ;  and  now  in  America  we  are  told  we 
must  increase  our  navy  and  add  to  our  army  because 
Europe  may  at  any  moment  combine  against  us. 


254  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

'This  is  fraud  and  untruth.  The  plain  people  in 
France,  Germany,  England,  and  America  are  opposed 
to  war.  We  only  wish  to  be  let  alone.  Men  with 
wives,  children,  sweethearts,  homes,  aged  parents, 
do  not  want  to  go  off  and  fight  someone.  We  are 
peaceable  and  we  fear  war  ;  we  hate  it. 

6  We  would  like  to  obey  the  Golden  Rule. 

'War  is  the  sure  result  of  the  existence  of  armed 
men.  That  country  which  maintains  a  large  standing 
army  will  sooner  or  later  have  a  war  on  hand.  The 
man  who  prides  himself  on  fisticuffs  is  going  some  day 
to  meet  a  man  who  considers  himself  the  better  man, 
and  they  will  fight.  Germany  and  France  have  no 
issue  save  a  desire  to  see  which  is  the  better  man.  They 
have  fought  many  times — and  they  will  fight  again. 
Not  that  the  people  want  to  fight,  but  the  Superior 
Class  fan  fright  into  fury,  and  make  men  think  they 
must  fight  to  protect  their  homes. 

6  So  the  people  who  wish  to  follow  the  teachings  of 
Christ  are  not  allowed  to  do  so,  but  are  taxed,  outraged, 
deceived  by  Governments. 

'Christ  taught  humility,  meekness,  the  forgiveness 
of  one's  enemies,  and  that  to  kill  was  wrong.  The 
Bible  teaches  men  not  to  swear ;  but  the  Superior 
Class  swear  us  on  the  Bible  in  which  they  do  not 
believe. 

'  The  question  is,  How  are  we  to  relieve  ourselves  of 
these  cormorants  who  toil  not,  but  who  are  clothed  in 
broadcloth  and  blue,  with  brass  buttons  and  many 
costly  accoutrements ;  who  feed  upon  our  substance, 
and  for  whom  we  delve  and  dig  ? 

1  Shall  we  fight  them  ? 

1  No,  we  do  not  believe  in  bloodshed  ;  and  besides 
that,  they  have  the  guns  and  the  money,  and  they  can 
hold  out  longer  than  we. 

4  But  who  composes  this  army  that  they  would  order 
to  fire  upon  us  ? 

1  Why,  our  neighbours  and  brothers — deceived  into 
the  idea  that  they  are  doing  God's  service  by  protecting 
their  country  from  its  enemies.     When  the  fact  is,  our 


PATRIOTISM  AND  GOVERNMENT       255 

country  has  no  enemies  save  the  Superior  Class,  that 
pretends  to  look  out  for  our  interests  if  we  will  only 
obey  and  consent  to  be  taxed. 

'Thus  do  they  siphon  our  resources  and  turn  our 
true  brothers  upon  us  to  subdue  and  humiliate  us.  You 
cannot  send  a  telegram  to  your  wife,  nor  an  express 
package  to  your  friend,  nor  draw  a  cheque  for  your 
grocer,  until  you  first  pay  the  tax  to  maintain  armed 
men,  who  can  quickly  be  used  to  kill  you  ;  and  who 
surely  will  imprison  you  if  you  do  not  pay. 

'The  only  relief  lies  in  education.  Educate  men 
that  it  is  wrong  to  kill.  Teach  them  the  Golden  Rule, 
and  yet  again  teach  them  the  Golden  Rule.  Silently 
defy  this  Superior  Class  by  refusing  to  bow  down  to 
their  fetich  of  bullets.  Cease  supporting  the  preachers 
who  cry  for  war  and  spout  patriotism  for  a  considera- 
tion. Let  them  go  to  work  as  we  do.  We  believe  in 
Christ — they  do  not.  Christ  spoke  what  he  thought ; 
they  speak  what  they  think  will  please  the  men  in 
power — the  Superior  Class. 

1  We  will  not  enlist.  We  will  not  shoot  on  their 
order.  We  will  not  "  charge  bayonet "  upon  a  mild  and 
gentle  people.  We  will  not  fire  upon  shepherds  and 
farmers,  fighting  for  their  firesides,  upon  a  suggestion 
of  Cecil  Rhodes.  Your  false  cry  of  "Wolf!  wolf!" 
shall  not  alarm  us.  We  pay  your  taxes  only  because 
we  have  to,  and  we  will  pay  no  longer  than  we  have 
to.  We  will  pay  no  pew-rents,  no  tithes  to  your  sham 
charities,  and  we  will  speak  our  minds  upon  occasion. 

*  We  will  educate  men. 

'And  all  the  time  our  silent  influence  will  be  going 
out,  and  even  the  men  who  are  conscripted  will  be  half- 
hearted and  refuse  to  fight.  We  will  educate  men  into 
the  thought  that  the  Christ  Life  of  Peace  and  Good- 
will is  better  than  the  Life  of  Strife,  Bloodshed,  and 
War. 

'  "Peace  on  earth  !" — it  can  only  come  when  men 
do  away  with  armies,  and  are  willing  to  do  unto  other 
men  as  they  would  be  done  by/ 

So  writes  a  citizen  of  the  United  States ;  and  from 


256  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

various  sides,  in  various  forms,  such  voices  are 
sounding. 

This  is  what  a  German  soldier  writes  : 

'I  went  through  two  campaigns  with  the  Prussian 
Guards  (in  1866  and  1870),  and  I  hate  war  from  the 
bottom  of  my  soul,  for  it  has  made  me  inexpressibly 
unfortunate.  We  wounded  soldiers  generally  receive 
such  a  miserable  recompense  that  we  have  indeed  to  be 
ashamed  of  having  once  been  patriots.  I,  for  instance, 
get  ninepence  a  day  for  my  right  arm,  which  was  shot 
through  at  the  attack  on  St.  Privat,  August  18,  1870. 
Some  hunting  dogs  have  more  allowed  for  their  keep. 
And  I  have  suffered  for  years  from  my  twice  wounded 
arm.  Already  in  1866  I  took  part  in  the  war  against 
Austria,  and  fought  at  Trautenau  and  Koniggratz,  and 
saw  horrors  enough.  In  1870,  being  in  the  reserve 
I  was  called  out  again  ;  and,  as  I  have  already  said,  I 
was  wounded  in  the  attack  at  St.  Privat :  my  right  arm 
was  twice  shot  through  lengthwise.  I  had  to  leave  a 
good  place  in  a  brewery,  and  was  unable  afterwards  to 
regain  it.  Since  then  I  have  never  been  able  to  get  on  my 
feet  again.  The  intoxication  soon  passed,  and  there  was 
nothing  left  for  the  wounded  invalid  but  to  keep  himself 
alive  on  a  beggarly  pittance  eked  out  by  charity.  .  .  . 

(In  a  world  in  which  people  run  round  like  trained 
animals,  and  are  not  capable  of  any  other  idea  than  that 
of  overreaching  one  another  for  the  sake  of  mammon — 
in  such  a  world  let  people  think  me  a  crank  ;  but,  for 
all. that,  I  feel  in  myself  the  divine  idea  of  peace,  which 
is  so  beautifully  expressed  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount. 
My  deepest  conviction  is  that  war  is  only  trade  on  a 
larger  scale — the  ambitious  and  powerful  trade  with  the 
happiness  of  the  peoples. 

'  And  what  horrors  do  we  not  suffer  from  it  !  Never 
shall  I  forget  the  pitiful  groans  that  pierced  one  to  the 
marrow  ! 

'  People  who  never  did  each  other  any  harm  begin  to 
slaughter  one  another  like  wild  animals,  and  petty, 
slavish  souls— implicate  the  good  God,  making  Him 
their  confederate  in  such  deeds. 


PATRIOTISM  AND  GOVERNMENT        257 

c  My  neighbour  in  the  ranks  had  his  jaw  broken  by  a 
bullet.  The  poor  wretch  went  wild  with  pain.  He  ran 
like  a  madman,  and  in  the  scorching  summer  heat  could 
not  even  get  water  to  cool  his  horrible  wound.  Our 
commander,  the  Crown  Prince  (who  was  afterwards  the 
noble  Emperor  Frederick),  wrote  in  his  diary  :  u  War 
— is  an  irony  on  the  Gospels. *  .  .  .' 

People  are  beginning  to  understand  the  fraud  of 
patriotism,  in  which  all  the  Governments  take  such 
pains  to  keep  them  involved. 


( But/  it  is  usually  asked,  '  what  will  there  be  instead 
of  Governments  ?' 

There  will  be  nothing.  Something  that  has  long 
been  useless,  and  therefore  superfluous  and  bad,  will  be 
abolished.  An  organ  that,  being  unnecessary,  has 
become  harmful,  will  be  abolished. 

6  But/  people  generally  say,  '  if  there  is  no  Govern- 
ment, people  will  violate  and  kill  each  other/ 

Why  ?  Why  should  the  abolition  of  the  organization 
which  arose  in  consequence  of  violence,  and  which  has 
been  handed  down  from  generation  to  generation  to  do 
violence — why  should  the  abolition  of  such  an  organiza- 
tion, now  devoid  of  use,  cause  people  to  outrage  and 
kill  one  another  ?  On  the  contrary,  the  presumption 
is  that  the  abolition  of  the  organ  of  violence  would 
result  in  people  ceasing  to  violate  and  kill  one  another. 

Now,  some  men  are  specially  educated  and  trained  to 
kill  and  to  do  violence  to  other  people — there  are  men 
who  are  supposed  to  have  a  right  to  use  violence,  and 
who  make  use  of  an  organization  which  exists  for  that 
purpose.  Such  deeds  of  violence  and  such  killing  are 
considered  good  and  worthy  deeds. 

But  then,  people  will  not  be  so  brought  up,  and  no 
one  will  have  a  right  to  use  violence  to  others,  and 
there  will  be  no  organization  to  do  violence,  and — as  is 
natural  to  people  of  our  time — violence  and  murder  will 
always  be  considered  bad  actions,  no  matter  who  com- 
mits them. 


258  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

But  should  acts  of  violence  continue  to  be  committed 
even  after  the  abolition  of  the  Governments,  such  acts 
will  certainly  be  fewer  than  are  committed  now,  when 
an  organization  exists  specially  devised  to  commit  acts 
of  violence,  and  a  state  of  things  exists  in  which  acts  of 
violence  and  murders  are  considered  good  and  useful 
deeds. 

The  abolition  of  Governments  will  merely  rid  us  of 
an  unnecessary  organization  which  we  have  inherited 
from  the  past,  an  organization  for  the  commission  of 
violence  and  for  its  justification. 

'But  there  will  then  be  no  laws,  no  property,  no 
courts  of  justice,  no  police,  no  popular  education,'  say 
people,  who  intentionally  confuse  the  use  of  violence  by 
Governments  with  various  social  activities. 

The  abolition  of  the  organization  of  Government 
formed  to  do  violence,  does  not  at  all  involve  the 
abolition  of  what  is  reasonable  and  good,  and  there- 
fore not  based  on  violence,  in  laws  or  law  courts,  or 
in  property,  or  in  police  regulations,  or  in  financial 
arrangements,  or  in  popular  education.  On  the  con- 
trary, the  absence  of  the  brutal  power  of  Government, 
which  is  needed  only  for  its  own  support,  will  facilitate 
a  juster  and  more  reasonable  social  organization,  need- 
ing no  violence.  Courts  of  justice,  and  public  affairs, 
and  popular  education,  will  all  exist  to  the  extent  to 
which  they  are  really  needed  by  the  people,  but  in  a 
shape  which  will  not  involve  the  evils  contained  in 
the  present  form  of  Government.  Only  that  will  be 
destroyed  which  was  evil  and  hindered  the  free  expres- 
sion of  the  people's  will. 

But  even  if  we  assume  that  with  the  absence  of 
Governments  there  would  be  disturbances  and  civil 
strife,  even  then  the  position  of  the  people  would  be 
better  than  it  is  at  present.  The  position  now  is  such 
that  it  is  difficult  to  imagine  anything  worse.  The 
people  are  ruined,  and  their  ruin  is  becoming  more  and 
more  complete.  The  men  are  all  converted  into  war- 
slaves,  and  have  from  day  to  day  to  expect  orders  to  go 
to  kill  and  to  be  killed.     What  more?    Are  the  ruined 


PATRIOTISM  AND  GOVERNMENT        259 

peoples  to  die  of  hunger  ?  Even  that  is  already  begin- 
ning in  Russia,  in  Italy,  and  in  India.  Or  are  the 
women  as  well  as  the  men  to  go  to  be  soldiers  ?  In  the 
Transvaal  even  that  has  begun. 

So  that  even  if  the  absence  of  Government  really 
meant  Anarchy  in  the  negative,  disorderly  sense  of  that 
word — which  is  far  from  being  the  case — even  then  no 
anarchical  disorder  could  be  worse  than  the  position  to 
which  Governments  have  already  led  their  peoples,  and 
to  which  they  are  leading  them. 

And  therefore  emancipation  from  patriotism,  and  the 
destruction  of  the  despotism  of  Government  that  rests 
upon  it,  cannot  but  be  beneficial  to  mankind. 


Men,  recollect  yourselves  !  For  the  sake  of  your 
well-being,  physical  and  spiritual,  for  the  sake  of  your 
brothers  and  sisters,  pause,  consider,  and  think  of  what 
you  are  doing ! 

Reflect,  and  you  will  understand  that  your  foes  are 
not  the  Boers,  or  the  English,  or  the  French,  or  the 
Germans,  or  the  Finns,  or  the  Russians,  but  that  your 
foes — your  only  foes — are  you  yourselves,  who  by  your 
patriotism  maintain  the  Governments  that  oppress  you 
and  make  you  unhappy. 

They  have  undertaken  to  protect  you  from  danger, 
and  they  have  brought  that  pseudo-protection  to  such 
a  point  that  you  have  all  become  soldiers — slaves,  and 
are  all  ruined,  or  are  being  ruined  more  and  more,  and 
at  any  moment  may  and  should  expect  that  the  tight- 
stretched  cord  will  snap,  and  a  horrible  slaughter  of 
you  and  your  children  will  commence. 

And  however  great  that  slaughter  may  be,  and  how- 
ever that  conflict  may  end,  the  same  state  of  things  will 
continue.  In  the  same  way,  and  with  yet  greater 
intensity,  the  Governments  will  arm,  and  ruin,  and 
pervert  you  and  your  children,  and  no  one  will  help 
you  to  stop  it  or  to  prevent  it,  if  you  do  not  help  your- 
selves. 

R   2 


260  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

And  there  is  only  one  kind  of  help  possible — it  lies 
in  the  abolition  of  that  terrible  linking  up  into  a  cone 
of  violence,,  which  enables  the  person  or  persons  who 
succeed  in  seizing  the  apex  to  have  power  over  all  the 
rest,  and  to  hold  that  power  the  more  firmly  the  more 
cruel  and  inhuman  they  are,  as  we  see  by  the  cases  of 
the  Napoleons,  Nicholas  L,  Bismarck,  Chamberlain, 
Rhodes,  and  our  Russian  Dictators  who  rule  the  people 
in  the  Tsar's  name. 

And  there  is  only  one  way  to  destroy  this  binding 
together — it  is  by  shaking  off  the  hypnotism  of 
patriotism. 

Understand  that  all  the  evils  from  which  you  suffer, 
you  yourselves  cause  by  yielding  to  the  suggestions 
by  which  Emperors,  Kings,  Members  of  Parliament, 
Governors,  officers,  capitalists,  priests,  authors,  artists, 
and  all  who  need  this  fraud  of  patriotism  in  order  to 
live  upon  your  labour,  deceive  you  ! 

Whoever  you  may  be — Frenchman,  Russian,  Pole, 
Englishman,  Irishman,  or  Bohemian — understand  that 
all  your  real  human  interests,  whatever  they  may  be — 
agricultural,  industrial,  commercial,  artistic,  or  scien- 
tific— as  well  as  your  pleasures  and  joys,  in  no  way 
run  counter  to  the  interests  of  other  peoples  or  States  ; 
and  that  you  are  united,  by  mutual  co-operation,  by 
interchange  of  services,  by  the  joy  of  wide  brotherly 
intercourse,  and  by  the  interchange  not  merely  of 
goods  but  also  of  thoughts  and  feelings,  with  the  folk 
of  other  lands. 

Understand  that  the  question  as  to  who  manages  to 
seize  Wei-hai-wei,  Port  Arthur,  or  Cuba — your  Govern- 
ment or  another — does  not  affect  you,  or,  rather,  that 
every  such  seizure  made  by  your  Government  injures 
you,  by  inevitably  bringing  in  its  train  all  sorts  of 
pressure  on  you  by  your  Government  to  force  you  to 
take  part  in  the  robbery  and  violence  by  which  alone 
such  seizures  are  made,  or  can  be  retained  when  made. 
Understand  that  your  life  can  in  no  way  be  bettered  by 
Alsace  becoming  German  or  French,  and  Ireland  or 
Poland  being  free  or  enslaved — whoever  holds  them. 


PATRIOTISM  AND  GOVERNMENT        261 

you  are  free  to  live  where  you  will,  if  even  you  be  an 
Alsatian,  an  Irishman,  or  a  Pole.  Understand,  too, 
that  by  stirring  up  patriotism  you  will  only  make  the 
case  worse,  for  the  subjection  in  which  your  people  are 
kept  has  resulted  simply  from  the  struggle  between 
patriotisms,  and  every  manifestation  of  patriotism  in 
one  nation  provokes  a  corresponding  reaction  in  another. 
Understand  that  salvation  from  your  woes  is  only  pos- 
sible when  you  free  yourself  from  the  obsolete  idea 
of  patriotism  and  from  the  obedience  to  Governments 
that  is  based  upon  it,  and  when  you  boldly  enter  into 
the  region  of  that  higher  idea,  the  brotherly  union  of 
the  peoples,  which  has  long  since  come  to  life,  and  from 
all  sides  is  calling  you  to  itself. 

If  people  would  but  understand  that  they  are  not 
the  sons  of  some  fatherland  or  other,  nor  of  Govern- 
ments, but  are  sons  of  God,  and  can  therefore  neither 
be  slaves  nor  enemies  one  to  another — those  insane, 
unnecessary,  worn-out,  pernicious  organizations  called 
Governments,  and  all  the  sufferings,  violations,  humilia- 
tions, and  crimes  which  they  occasion,  would  cease. 

[May  10,  o.s.,  1900.] 


XX 

'THOU  SHALT  NOT  KILL' 

'  Thou  shalt  not  kill.'— Exod.  xx.  13. 

1 The  disciple  is  not  above  his  master :  but  every  one 
when  he  is  perfected  shall  be  as  his  master.' — Luke  vi.  40. 

'  For  all  they  that  take  the  sword  shall  perish  with  the 
sword.' — Matt.  xxvi.  52. 

'Therefore  all  things  whatsoever  ye  would  that  men 
should  do  to  you,  do  ye  even  so  to  them.' — Matt.  vii.  12. 

When  Kings  are  executed  after  trial,  as  in  the  case 
of  Charles  I.,  Louis  XVI. ,  and  Maximilian  of  Mexico ; 
or  when  they  are  killed  in  Court  conspiracies,  like 
Peter  III.,  Paul,  and  various  Sultans,  Shahs,  and 
Kharis— little  is  said  about  it ;  but  when  they  are  killed 
without  a  trial  and  without  a  Court  conspiracy — as  in 
the  case  of  Henry  IV.  of  France,  Alexander  II.,  the 
Empress  of  Austria,  the  late  Shah  of  Persia,  and, 
recently,  Humbert — such  murders  excite  the  greatest 
surprise  and  indignation  among  Kings  and  Emperors 
and  their  adherents,  just  as  if  they  themselves  never 
took  part  in  murders,  nor  profited  by  them,  nor  insti- 
gated them.  But,  in  fact,  the  mildest  of  the  murdered 
Kings  (Alexander  II.  or  Humbert,  for  instance),  not  to 
speak  of  executions  in  their  own  countries,  were  insti- 
gators of,  and  accomplices  and  partakers  in,  the  murder 
of  tens  of  thousands  of  men  who  perished  on  the  field 
of  battle  ;  while  more  cruel  Kings  and  Emperors  have 
been  guilty  of  hundreds  of  thousands,  and  even  millions, 
of  murders. 

The  teaching  of  Christ  repeals  the  law,  ( An  eye  for 
an  eye,  and  a  tooth  for  a  tooth ';  but  those  who  have 
[  262  ] 


'THOU  SHALT  NOT  KILL5  263 

always  clung  to  that  law,  and  still  cling  to  it,  and  who 
apply  it  to  a  terrible  degree— not  only  claiming  c  an  eye 
for  an  eye/  but  without  provocation  decreeing  the 
slaughter  of  thousands,  as  they  do  when  they  declare 
war — have  no  right  to  be  indignant  at  the  application 
of  that  same  law  to  themselves  in  so  small  and  insignifi- 
cant a  degree  that  hardly  one  King  or  Emperor  is 
killed  for  each  hundred  thousand,  or  perhaps  even  for 
each  million,  who  are  killed  by  the  order  and  with  the 
consent  of  Kings  and  Emperors.  Kings  and  Emperors 
not  only  should  not  be  indignant  at  such  murders  as 
those  of  Alexander  II.  and  Humbert,  but  they  should 
be  surprised  that  such  murders  are  so  rare,  considering 
the  continual  and  universal  example  of  murder  that 
they  give  to  mankind. 

The  crowd  are  so  hypnotized  that  they  see  what  is 
going  on  before  their  eyes,  but  do  not  understand 
its  meaning.  They  see  what  constant  care  Kings, 
Emperors,  and  Presidents  devote  to  their  disciplined 
armies  ;  they  see  the  reviews,  parades,  and  manoeuvres 
the  rulers  hold,  about  which  they  boast  to  one  another ; 
and  the  people  crowd  to  see  their  own  brothers, 
brightly  dressed  up  in  fools'  clothes,  turned  into 
machines  to  the  sound  of  drum  and  trumpet,  all,  at 
the  shout  of  one  man)  making  one  and  the  same  move- 
ment at  one  and  the  same  moment — but  they  do  not 
understand  what  it  all  means.  Yet  the  meaning  of  this 
drilling  is  very  clear  and  simple  :  it  is  nothing  but 
a  preparation  for  killing. 

It  is  stupefying  men  in  order  to  make  them  fit  instru- 
ments for  murder.  And  those  who  do  this,  who  chiefly 
direct  this  and  are  proud  of  it,  are  the  Kings,  Emperors 
and  Presidents'.  And  it  is  just  these  men — who  are 
specially  occupied  in  organizing  murder  and  who  have 
made  murder  their  profession,  who  wear  military 
uniforms  and  carry  murderous  weapons  (swords)  at 
their  sides — that  are  horrified  and  indignant  when 
one  of  themselves  is  murdered. 

The  murder  of  Kings — the  murder  of  Humbert — is 
terrible,  but  not  on  account  of  its  cruelty.     The  things 


264  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

done  by  command  of  Kings  and  Emperors — not  only 
past  events  such  as  the  massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew, 
religious  butcheries,  the  terrible  repressions  of  peasant 
rebellions,  and  Paris  coups  d'etat,  but  the  present-day 
Government  executions,  the  doing-to-death  of  prisoners 
in  solitary  confinement,  the  Disciplinary  Battalions,  the 
hangings,  the  beheadings,  the  shootings  and  slaughter 
in  wars — are  incomparably  more  cruel  than  the  murders 
committed  by  Anarchists.  Nor  are  these  murders 
terrible  because  undeserved.  If  Alexander  II.  and 
Humbert  did  not  deserve  death,  still  less  did  the 
thousands  of  Russians  who  perished  at  Plevna,  or  of 
Italians  who  perished  in  Abyssinia.  Such  murders  are 
terrible,  not  because  they  are  cruel  or  unmerited, 
but  because  of  the  unreasonableness  of  those  who 
commit  them. 

If  the  regicides  act  under  the  influence  of  personal 
feelings  of  indignation  evoked  by  the  sufferings  of  an 
oppressed  people,  for  which  they  hold  Alexander  or 
Carnot  or  Humbert  responsible ;  or  if  they  act  from 
personal  feelings  of  revenge,  then — however  immoral 
their  conduct  may  be — it  is  at  least  intelligible ;  but 
how  is  it  that  a  body  of  men  (Anarchists,  we  are  told) 
such  as  those  by  whom  Bresci  was  sent,  and  who  are 
now  threatening  another  Emperor — how  is  that  they 
cannot  devise  any  better  means  of  improving  the  condi- 
tion of  humanity  than  by  killing  people  whose  destruc- 
tion can  no  more  be  of  use  than  the  decapitation  of 
that  mythical  monster  on  whose  neck  a  new  head 
appeared  as  soon  as  one  was  cut  off?  Kings  and 
Emperors  have  long  ago  arranged  for  themselves  a 
system  like  that  of  a  magazine-rifle  :  as  soon  as  one 
bullet  has  been  discharged  another  takes  its  place. 
Le  roi  est  mort,  vive  le  roi !  So  what  is  the  use  of 
killing  them  ? 

Only  on  a  most  superficial  view,  can  the  killing  of 
these  men  seem  a  means  of  saving  the  nations  from 
oppression  and  from  wars  destructive  of  human  life. 

One  only  need  remember  that  similar  oppression  and 
similar  war  went  on,  no  matter  who  was  at  the  head  of 


'THOU  SHALT  NOT  KILL'  265 

the  Government — Nicholas  or  Alexander,  Frederick  or 
Wilhelm,  Napoleon  or  Louis,  Palmerston  or  Gladstone, 
McKinley  or  anyone  else — in  order  to  understand  that 
it  is  not  any  particular  person  who  causes  these  oppres- 
sions and  these  wars  from  which  the  nations  suffer. 
The  misery  of  nations  is  caused  not  by  particular 
persons,  but  by  the  particular  order  of  Society  under 
which  the  people  are  so  tied  up  together  that  they  find 
themselves  all  in  the  power  of  a  few  men,  or  more  often 
in  the  power  of  one  single  man  :  a  man  so  perverted  by 
his  unnatural  position  as  arbiter  of  the  fate  and  lives  of 
millions,  that  he  is  always  in  an  unhealthy  state,  and 
always  suffers  more  or  less  from  a  mania  of  self-aggran- 
dizement, which  only  his  exceptional  position  conceals 
from  general  notice. 

Apart  from  the  fact  that  such  men  are  surrounded 
from  earliest  childhood  to  the  grave  by  the  most  insen- 
sate luxury  and  an  atmosphere  of  falsehood  and  flattery 
which  always  accompanies  them,  their  whole  education 
and  all  their  occupations  are  centred  on  one  object  : 
learning  about  former  murders,  the  best  present-day 
ways  of  murdering,  and  the  best  preparations  for  future 
murder.  From  childhood  they  learn  about  killing  in 
all  its  possible  forms.  They  always  carry  about  with 
them  murderous  weapons — swords  or  sabres  ;  they  dress 
themselves  in  various  uniforms ;  they  attend  parades, 
reviews  and  manoeuvres  ;  they  visit  one  another,  pre- 
senting one  another  with  Orders  and  nominating  one 
another  to  the  command  of  regiments — and  not  only 
does  no  one  tell  them  plainly  what  they  are  doing,  or 
say  that  to  busy  one's  self  with  preparations  for  killing 
is  revolting  and  criminal,  but  from  all  sides  they  hear 
nothing  but  approval  and  enthusiasm  for  all  this  activity 
of  theirs.  Every  time  they  go  out,  and  at  each  parade 
and  review,  crowds  of  people  flock  to  greet  them  with 
enthusiasm,  and  it  seems  to  them  as  if  the  whole  nation 
approves  of  their  conduct.  The  only  part  of  the  Press 
that  reaches  them,  and  that  seems  to  them  the  expres- 
sion of  the  feelings  of  the  whole  people,  or  at  least  of 
its  best  representatives,  most  slavishly  extols  their  every 


266  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

word  and  action,  however  silly  or  wicked  they  may  be. 
Those  around  them,  men  and  women,  clergy  and  laity 
— all  people  who  do  not  prize  human  dignity — vying 
with  one  another  in  refined  flattery,  agree  with  them 
about  anything  and  deceive  them  about  everything, 
making  it  impossible  for  them  to  see  life  as  it  is.  Such 
rulers  might  live  a  hundred  years  without  ever  seeing 
one  single  really  independent  man  or  ever  hearing  the 
truth  spoken.  One  is  sometimes  appalled  to  hear  of 
the  words  and  deeds  of  these  men  ;  but  one  need  only 
consider  their  position  in  order  to  understand  that  any- 
one in  their  place  would  act  as  they  do.  If  a  reasonable 
man  found  himself  in  their  place,  there  is  only  one 
reasonable  action  he  could  perform,  and  that  would  be 
to  get  away  from  such  a  position.  Any  one  remaining 
in  it  would  behave  as  they  do. 

What,  indeed,  must  go  on  in  the  head  of  some 
Wilhelm  of  Germany — a  narrow-minded,  ill-educated, 
vain  man,  with  the  ideals  of  a  German  Junker — when 
there  is  nothing  he  can  say  so  stupid  or  so  horrid  that 
it  will  not  be  met  by  an  enthusiastic  '  Hoch  /'  and  be 
commented  on  by  the  Press  of  the  entire  world  as 
though  it  were  something  highly  important.  When 
he  says  that,  at  his  word,  soldiers  should  be  ready  to 
kill  th,eir  own  fathers,  people  shout  '  Hurrah  !'  When 
he  says  that  the  Gospel  must  be  introduced  with  an 
iron  fist — '  Hurrah  !'  When  he  says  the  army  is  to  take 
no  prisoners  in  China,  but  to  slaughter  everybody,  he 
is  not  put  into  a  lunatic  asylum,  but  people  shout 
•  Hurrah  !'  and  set  sail  for  China  to  execute  his  com- 
mands. Or  Nicholas  II.  (a  man  naturally  modest) 
begins  his  reign  by  announcing  to  venerable  old  men 
who  had  expressed  a  wish  to  be  allowed  to  discuss  their 
own  affairs,  that  such  ideas  of  self-government  were 
'  insensate  dreams/ — and  the  organs  of  the  Press  he 
sees,  and  the  people  he  meets,  praise  him  for  it.  He 
proposes  a  childish,  silly,  and  hypocritical  project  of 
universal  peace,  while  at  the  same  time  ordering  an 
increase  in  the  army — and  there  are  no  limits  to  the 
laudations  of  his  wisdom   and   virtue.     Without   any 


'THOU  SHALT  NOT  KILL'  267 

need,  he  foolishly  and  mercilessly  insults  and  oppresses 
a  whole  nation,  the  Finns,  and  again  he  hears  nothing 
but  praise.  Finally,  he  arranges  the  Chinese  slaughter 
— terrible  in  its  injustice,  cruelty  and  incompatibility 
with  his  peace  projects — and,  from  all  sides,  people 
applaud  him,  both  as  a  victor  and  as  a  continuer  of  his 
father's  peace  policy. 

What,  indeed,  must  be  going  on  in  the  heads  and 
hearts  of  these  men  ? 

So  it  is  not  the  Alexanders  and  Humberts,  nor  the 
Wilhelms,  Nicholases,  and  Chamberlains — though  they 
decree  these  oppressions  of  the  nations  and  these  wars 
— who  are  really  the  most  guilty  of  these  sins,  but  it  is 
rather  those  who  place  and  support  them  in  the  position 
of  arbiters  over  the  lives  of  their  fellow- men.  And, 
therefore,  the  thing  to  do  is  not  to  kill  Alexanders, 
Nicholases,  Wilhelms,  and  Humberts,  but  to  cease  to 
support  the  arrangement  of  society  of  which  they  are  a 
result.  And  what  supports  the  present  order  of  society 
is  the  selfishness  and  stupefaction  of  the  people,  who 
sell  their  freedom  and  honour  for  insignificant  material 
advantages. 

People  who  stand  on  the  lowest  rung  of  the  ladder — 
partly  as  a  result  of  being  stupefied  by  a  patriotic  and 
pseudo-religious  education,  and  partly  for  the  sake  of 

Eersonal  advantages — cede  their  freedom  and  sense  of 
uman  dignity  at  the  bidding  of  these  who  stand  above 
them  and  offer  them  material  advantages.  In  the  same 
way — in  consequence  of  stupefaction,  and  chiefly  for  the 
sake  of  advantages — those  who  are  a  little  higher  up  the 
ladder  cede  their  freedom  and  manly  dignity,  and 
the  same  thing  repeats  itself  with  those  standing  yet 
higher,  and  so  on  to  the  topmost  rung — to  those  who, 
or  to  him  who,  standing  at  the  apex  of  the  social  cone 
have  nothing  more  to  obtain :  for  whom  the  only 
motives  of  action  are  love  of  power  and  vanity,  and  who 
are  generally  so  perverted  and  stupefied  by  the  power 
of  life  and  death  which  they  hold  over  their  fellow-men, 
and  by  the  consequent  servility  and  flattery  of  those 
who  surround  them,  that,  without  ceasing  to  do  evil, 


268  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

they  feel  quite  assured  that  they  are  benefactors  to  the 
human  race. 

It  is  the  people  who  sacrifice  their  dignity  as  men  for 
material  profit  that  produce  these  men  who  cannot  act 
otherwise  than  as  they  do  act,  and  with  whom  it  is  use- 
less to  be  angry  for  their  stupid  and  wicked  actions. 
To  kill  such  men  is  like  whipping  children  whom  one 
has  first  spoilt. 

That  nations  should  not  be  oppressed,  and  that  there 
should  be  none  of  these  useless  wars,  and  that  men 
may  not  be  indignant  with  those  who  seem  to  cause 
these  evils,  and  may  not  kill  them — it  seems  that  only  a 
very  small  thing  is  necessary.  It  is  necessary  that  men 
should  understand  things  as  they  are,  should  call  them 
by  their  right  names,  and  should  know  that  an  army  is 
an  instrument  for  killing,  and  that  the  enrolment  and 
management  of  an  army — the  very  things  which  Kings, 
Emperors,  and  Presidents  occupy  themselves  with  so 
self-confidently — is  a  preparation  for  murder. 

If  only  each  King,  Emperor,  and  President  under- 
stood that  his  work  of  directing  armies  is  not  an 
honourable  and  important  duty,  as  his  flatterers  persuade 
him  it  is,  but  a  bad  and  shameful  act  of  preparation  for 
murder — and  if  each  private  individual  understood  that 
the  payment  of  taxes  wherewith  to  hire  and  equip 
soldiers,  and,  above  all,  army-service  itself,  are  not 
matters  of  indifference,  but  are  bad  and  shameful 
actions  by  which  he  not  only  permits  but  participates 
in  murder — then  this  power  of  Emperors,  Kings,  and 
Presidents,  which  now  arouses  our  indignation,  and 
which  causes  them  to  be  murdered,  would  disappear  of 
itself. 

So  that  the  Alexanders,  Carnots,  Humberts,  and 
others  should  not  be  murdered,  but  it  should  be 
explained  to  them  that  they  are  themselves  murderers, 
and,  chiefly,  they  should  not  be  allowed  to  kill  people  : 
men  should  refuse  to  murder  at  their  command. 

If  people  do  not  yet  act  in  this  way,  it  is  only 
because  Governments^  to  maintain  themselves,  dili- 
gently exercise  a  hypnotic  influence  upon  the  people. 


•THOU  SHALT  NOT  KILL'  269 

And,  therefore,  we  may  help  to  prevent  people  killing 
either  Kings  or  one  another,  not  by  killing — murder 
only  increases  the  hypnotism — but  by  arousing  people 
from  their  hypnotic  condition. 

And  it  is  this  I  have  tried  to  do  by  these  remarks. 

[August  8,  o.s.,  1900.] 

Prohibited  in  Russia,  an  attempt  was  made  to  print  this 
article  in  the  Russian  language  in  Germany ;  but  the  edition 
was  seized  in  July,  1903,  and  after  a  trial  in  the  Provincial 
Court  of  Leipzig  (August,  1903)  it  was  pronounced  to  be 
insulting  to  the  German  Kaiser,  and  all  copies  were  ordered 
to  be  destroyed. 


XXI 

TO  THE  TSAR  AND  HIS  ASSISTANTS 

Again  there  are  murders,  again  disturbances  and 
slaughter  in  the  streets,  again  we  shall  have  execu- 
tions, terror,  false  accusations,  threats  and  anger  on 
the  one  side  ;  and  hatred,  thirst  for  vengeance,  and 
readiness  for  self-sacrifice,  on  the  other.  Again  all 
Russians  are  divided  into  two  hostile  camps,  and 
are  committing  and  preparing  to  commit  the  greatest 
crimes. 

Very  possibly  the  disturbances  that  have  now  broken 
out  may  be  suppressed,  though  it  is  also  possible  that 
the  troops  of  soldiers  and  of  police,  on  whom  the 
Government  place  such  reliance,  may  realize  that  they 
are  being  called  on  to  commit  the  terrible  crime  of 
fratricide — and  may  refuse  to  obey.  But  even  if  the 
present  disturbance  is  suppressed,  it  will  not  be  extin- 
guished, but  will  burn  in  secret  more  and  more  fiercely, 
and  will  inevitably  burst  out  sooner  or  later  with 
increased  strength,  and  produce  yet  greater  sufferings 
and  crimes. 

Why  is  this  ?  Why  should  these  things  occur,  when 
they  might  so  easily  be  avoided  ? 

We  address  all  you  who  are  in  power,  from  the  Tsar, 
the  members  of  the  Council  of  State,  and  Ministers,  to 
the  relations — uncles,  brothers,  and  entourage  of  the 
Tsar,  and  all  who  can  influence  him  by  persuasion. 
We  appeal  to  you  not  as  to  enemies,  but  as  to  brothers, 
who,  whether  willingly  or  not,  are  inseparably  bound 
up  with  us,  so  that  all  the  sufferings  we  undergo  react 
on  you  also — and  react  much  more  painfully  if  you  feel 
[  270  ] 


TO  THE  TSAR  AND  HIS  ASSISTANTS    271 

that  you  could  remove  these  sufferings  but  have  failed 
to  do  so — we  appeal  to  you  to  act  so  that  the  existing 
state  of  things  may  cease. 

It  seems  to  you,  or  to  most  of  you,  that  it  has  all 
happened  because,  amid  the  regular  current  of  life, 
some  troublesome,  dissatisfied  men  have  arisen,  who 
disturb  the  people  and  interrupt  this  regular  current ; 
and  that  what  is  wrong  is  all  the  fault  of  these  people. 
So  that  these  troublesome,  dissatisfied  people  should  be 
subdued  and  repressed,  and  then  everything  will  again 
go  all  right,  and  nothing  will  need  to  be  altered. 

But  if,  really,  it  were  all  due  to  troublesome  and 
wicked  men,  it  would  be  only  necessary  to  catch  them 
and  shut  them  up  in  prison  and  execute  them,  and  all 
disturbances  would  be  at  end.  But,  in  fact,  during 
more  than  thirty  years,  these  people  have  been  caught, 
imprisoned  and  executed,  or  banished  by  thousands — 
yet  their  number  is  ever  increasing,  and  discontent  with 
the  present  conditions  of  life  not  only  grows,  but  spreads 
so  that  it  has  now  reached  millions  of  the  working 
classes — the  great  majority  of  the  whole  nation.  Evi- 
dently this  dissatisfaction  is  not  caused  by  troublesome 
and  wicked  men,  but  by  something  else.  And  you  of 
the  Government  need  only  turn  your  attention  for  a 
moment  from  the  acute  strife  in  which  you  are  now 
absorbed,  and  cease  to  credit  naively  the  statement 
made  by  the  Minister  of  the  Interior  in  a  recent 
circular,  namely,  that  'it  is  only  necessary  for  the 
police  to  disperse  the  crowd  promptly,  and  to  fire  at  it 
if  it  does  not  disperse,  for  all  to  be  tranquil  and  quiet/ 
and  you  will  clearly  see  the  cause  that  produces  discon- 
tent among  the  people,  and  finds  expression  in  disturb- 
ances which  are  assuming  ever  greater  and  wider  and 
deeper  dimensions. 

Those  causes  are,  that  because,  unfortunately,  a  Tsar 
who  had  freed  the  serfs  happened  to  be  murdered  by  a 
small  group  of  people  who  mistakenly  imagined  that 
they  would  thereby  serve  the  nation,  the  Government 
has  not  only  decided  not  to  advance  in  the  direction  of 
gradually  discarding  despotic  methods  (at  variance  with 


272  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

all  the  present  conditions  of  life),  but,  on  the  contrary, 
imagining  safety  to  lie  in  those  coarse  and  obsolete 
methods  of  despotism — instead  of  advancing  in  agree- 
ment with  the  general  development  and  increasing  com- 
plexity of  modern  life — has,  for  twenty  years,  not  even 
stood  still,  but  has  receded,  and  by  this  retrograde 
movement  has  separated  itself  more  and  more  from 
the  people  and  their  demands. 

So  that  it  is  not  some  wicked  and  troublesome  people, 
but  it  is  you  yourselves — the  rulers,  who  do  not  wish  to 
consider  anything  but  your  own  tranquillity  for  the 
passing  moment.  The  thing  needecj  is  not  that  you 
should  defend  yourselves  from  enemies  who  wish  to 
injure  you — no  one  wishes  to  injure  you — but  the  thing 
needed  is,  that  having  recognised  the  cause  of  the  social 
discontent  you  should  remove  it.  Men,  as  a  whole, 
cannot  desire  discord  and  enmity,  but  always  prefer  to 
live  in  agreement  and  amity  with  their  fellows.  And 
if  they  now  are  disquiet  and  seem  to  wish  you  ill,  it  is 
only  because  you  appear  to  them  as  an  obstacle  depriving 
not  only  them,  but  millions  of  their  brothers,  of  the 
best  human  blessings — freedom  and  enlightenment. 

That  they  may  cease  to  be  perturbed  and  to  attack 
you,  Very  little  is  required,  and  that  little  is  so' neces- 
sary for  you  yourselves,  and  would  so  evidently  give 
you  peace,  that  it  will  be  strange  indeed  if  you  do  not 
grant  it. 

What  needs  to  be  done  at  once  is  very  little.  Only 
the  following  : 

First :  To  grant  the  peasants  equal  rights  with  all 
other  citizens,  and  therefore  to — 

(a)  Abolish  the  stupid,  arbitrary  institution  of  the 
Zemsky  Natchdhriks* 

(b)  Repeal  the  special  rules,  framed  to  regulate  the 
relations  between  workmen  and  their  employers. 

(c)  Free  the  peasants  from  the  constraint  of  needing 
passports  to  move  from  place  to  place,  and  also  from 
the  compulsion  laid  only  on  them,  to  furnish  lodging 
and  horses  for  officials,  and  men  for  police  service. 

*  See  footnote,  p.  198. 


TO  THE  TSAR  AND  HIS  ASSISTANTS    273 

(d)  Free  them  from  the  unjust  law  which  makes  them 
jointly  responsible  for  other  peasants'  debts,  and  from 
the  land-redemption  payments  which  have  already, 
long  ago,  exceeded  the  value  of  the  land  received  by 
them  at  the  time  of  their  emancipation. 

(e)  And,  chiefly,  abolish  the  senseless,  utterly  un- 
necessary and  shameful  system  of  corporal  punishment, 
which  has  been  retained  only  for  the  most  industrious, 
moral,  and  numerous  class  of  the  population. 

To  equalize  the  rights  of  the  peasantry  (who  form  the 
immense  majority  of  the  people)  with  the  rights  of  the 
other  classes  is  particularly  important,  for  no  social 
system  can  be  durable  or  stable,  under  which  the 
majority  does  not  enjoy  equal  rights  but  is  kept  in  a 
servile  position,  and  is  bound  by  exceptional  laws. 
Only  when  the  labouring  majority  have  the  same  rights 
as  all  other  citizens,  and  are  freed  from  shameful  dis- 
abilities, is  a  firm  order  of  society  possible. 

Secondly :  The  Statute  of  Increased  Protection* — 
which  abolishes  all  existing  laws  and  hands  over  the 
population  into  the  power  of  officials,  who  are  often 
immoral,  stupid,  and  cruel — must  cease  to  be  applied. 
Its  disuse  is  specially  important  because,  by  stopping 
the  action  of  the  common  law,  it  develops  the  practice 
of  secret  denunciations  and  the  spy  system,  it  en- 
courages and  evokes  gross  violence,  often  employed 
against  working  men  who  have  differences  with  their 
employers  or  with  the  land-owners  (nowhere  are  such 
cruelties  practised  as  in  the  districts  where  this  statute 
is  in  force).  But  above  all  is  its  disuse  important, 
because  to  this  terrible  measure,  and  to  it  alone,  do  we 
owe  the  introduction  and  more  and  more  frequent 
infliction  of  capital  punishment — which  most  surely 
depraves  men,'  is  contrary  to  the  Christian  spirit  of  the 
Russian  people,  was  formerly  unknown  in  our  code  of 
laws,  and  is  itself  the  greatest  of  crimes,  and  one  for- 
bidden by  God  and  by  conscience. 

Thirdly :  All  barriers  to  education,  instruction,  and 

*  See  footnote,  p.  202. 


274  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

to  imparting  knowledge,  should  be  destroyed.     It  is 
necessary — 

(a)  To  make  no  distinctions  debarring  people  of  any 
class  from  education,  and  therefore  to  abolish  all 
restrictions  aimed  specially  at  the  peasant  class  (for- 
bidding popular  readings,  classes,  and  books,  for  some 
reason  supposed  to  be  bad  for  the  common  people). 

(b)  To  allow  people  of  any  race  or  religion  (not 
excepting  the  Jews,  who  for  some  reason  are  now 
deprived  of  that  right)  to  have  access  to  all  schools. 

(c)  To  cease  to  hinder  teachers  from  using  in  school 
the  language  spoken  by  the  children  who  attend  the 
school. 

(d)  And,  above  all,  to  allow  the  establishment  and 
continuance  of  all  sorts  of  private  schools  (elementary 
and  higher)  by  all  who  wish  to  devote  themselves  to 
education. 

To  set  education  and  instruction  free  from  the  re- 
straints now  imposed  upon  them  is  important,  because 
these  restraints  alone  hinder  the  working  people  from 
freeing  themselves  from  that  very  ignorance  which  now 
serves  the  Government  as  a  chief  excuse  for  imposing 
restraints  on  the  peasants.  The  liberation  of  the  work- 
ing classes  from  Governmental  interference  in  matters 
of  education  would  be  the  easiest  and  quickest  way  to 
enable  the  people  to  gain  all  the  knowledge  they 
need,  in  place  of  such  knowledge  as  is  now  being 
forced  upon  them.  Liberty  for  private  schools  to  be 
opened  and  maintained  by  private  people  would  end 
the  disturbances  now  continually  arising  among  students 
dissatisfied  with  the  management  of  the  establishments 
in  which  they  find  themselves.  Were  there  no  obstacles 
to  opening  private  schools  and  colleges,  both  elemen- 
tary and  advanced,  young  people  dissatisfied  with  the 
management  of  the  Government  educational  institu- 
tions would  enter  private  establishments  which  suited 
their  requirements. 

Lastly,  fourthly,  and  most  important  of  all,  all 
limitation  of  religious  liberty  should  be  abolished.  It 
is  necessary — 


TO  THE  TSAR  AND  HIS  ASSISTANTS     275 

(a)  To  repeal  all  the  laws  under  which  any  seces- 
sion from  the  established  Church  is  punished  as  a 
crime. 

(b)  To  allow  Old-Believers,*  Baptists,  Molokans,-t 
Stundists,;J  and  others,  to  open  and  maintain  churches, 
chapels,  and  houses  of  prayer. 

(c)  To  allow  religious  meetings  and  the  preaching  of 
all  faiths. 

(d)  Not  to  hinder  people  of  different  faiths  from 
educating  their  children  in  those  faiths. 

It  is  necessary  to  do  this  because,  apart  from  the 
fact  shown  by  history  and  science,  and  generally  ad- 
mitted, that  religious  persecutions  fail  to  effect  their 
object,  and  even  produce  a  reverse  effect  by  strengthen- 
ing what  people  wish  to  destroy — and  apart  from  the 
fact  that  the  intervention  of  Government  in  matters  of 
faith  produces  that  most  harmful  and  therefore  worst 
of  vices,  hypocrisy,  which  Christ  so  strongly  denounced, 
— not  to  speak  of  all  that,,  the  interference  of  Govern- 
ment in  matters  of  faith  hinders  each  individual  and 
the  whole  people  from  attaining  that  highest  blessing — 
union  with  one  another.  For  union  is  attained,  not  by 
the  forcible  and  impossible  retention  of  all  men  in  the 
bonds  of  one  and  the  same  external,  once-accepted, 
confession  of  a  religious  teaching  to  which  infallibility 
is  attributed,  but  only  by  the  free  advance  of  the 
whole  of  humanity  towards  truth,  which  alone,  there- 
fore, can  truly  unite  men. 

Such  are  the  modest  and  easily  realizable  desires,  we 
believe,  of  the  immense  majority  of  the  Russian  people. 

*  The  Old-Believers  is  a  general  name  for  the  sects  that 
separated  from  the  Russo-Greek  Church  in  the  seventeenth 
and  early  in  the  eighteenth  centuries. 

f  The  Molokans  are  a  more  modern  sect.  They  reject 
the  Sacraments  and  the  ceremonial  of  the  Russo-Greek 
Church,  and  pay  much  attention  to  the  Bible. 

t  Stundist  is  a  general  name  for  the  Protestant  and 
rationalistic  sects  of  many  shades  that  have  rapidly  sprung 
up  and  increased,  chiefly  in  South  Russia,  during  the  last 
quarter  of  a  century. 

s  2 


276  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

The  adoption  of  these  measures  would  undoubtedly 
pacify  the  people,  and  free  them  from  those  terrible 
sufferings  and  (what  is  worse  than  sufferings)  crimes, 
which  will  inevitably  be  committed  on  both  sides,  if 
the  Government  busies  itself  only  with  the  suppression 
of  these  disturbances,  leaving  their  cause  untouched. 

We  appeal  to  you  all — to  the  Tsar,  to  the  Ministers, 
to  the  Members  of  the  Council  of  State,  to  the  Privy 
Councillors,  and  to  those  who  surround  the  Tsar — to 
all,  in  general,  who  have  power  :  to  help  to  give  peace 
to  the  nation,  and  free  it  from  suffering  and  crime. 
We  appeal  to  you,  not  as  to  men  of  a  hostile  camp,  but 
as  to  men  who  must  of  necessity  agree  with  us,  as  to 
fellow-workers  and  brothers. 

It  cannot  be  that,  in  a  society  of  men  mutually 
bound  together,  one  section  should  feel  at  ease  while 
it  is  ill  with  another.  And  especially  is  this  so  if  it 
is  the  majority  that  suffers.  It  can  be  well  for  all, 
only  when  it  is  well  for  the  strongest  and  most  indus- 
trious majority,  which  supports  the  whole  society. 

Help,  then,  to  improve  the  position  of  that  majority, 
and  help  it  in  that  which  is  most  important :  in  what 
regards  its  freedom  and  enlightenment.  Only  then 
can  your  position  also  be  safe  and  really  strong. 

This  is  written  by  Leo  Tolstoy,  who  in  writing  it 
has  tried  to  express  not  his  own  thoughts  only,  but  the 
opinion  of  many  of  the  best,  kindest,  most  disinterested, 
most  reasonable  people — who  all  desire  these  things. 

[March  15,  o.s.,  1901.] 


XXII 

A  REPLY  TO  THE  SYNOD'S  EDICT  OF  EXCOM- 
MUNICATION, AND  TO  LETTERS  RECEIVED 
BY  ME  CONCERNING  IT 

1  He  who  begins  by  loving  Christianity  better  than  truth, 
will  proceed  by  loving  his  own  sect  or  church  better  than 
Christianity,  and  end  in  loving  himself  better  than  all.' — 
Coleridge. 

At  first  I  did  not  wish  to  reply  to  the  Synod's  Edict 
about  me  but  it  has  called  forth  very  many  letters  in 
which  correspondents  unknown  to  me  write — some  of 
them  scolding  me  for  rejecting  things  I  never  rejected  ; 
others  exhorting  me  to  believe  in  things  I  have  always 
believed  in  ;  others,  again,  expressing  an  agreement 
with  me  which  probably  does  not  really  exist,  and  a 
sympathy  to  which  I  am  hardly  entitled.  So  I  have 
decided  to  reply  both  to  the  Edict  itself— indicating 
what  is  unjust  in  it — and  to  the  communications  of  my 
unknown  correspondents. 

The  Edict  of  the  Synod  has,  in  general,  many  defects. 
It  is  either  illegal,  or  else  intentionally  equivocal  ;  it  is 
arbitrary,  unfounded,  untruthful,  and  is  also  libellous, 
and  incites  to  evil  feelings  and  deeds. 

It  is  illegal  or  intentionally  equivocal ;  for  if  it  is 
intended  as  an  Excommunication  from  the  Church, 
it  fails  to  conform  to  the  Church  regulations  subject  to 
which  Excommunications  can  be  pronounced  ;  while  if 
it  is  merely  an  announcement  of  the  fact  that  one  who 
does  not  believe  in  the  Church  and  its  dogmas  does 
not  belong  to  the  Church — that  is  self-evident,  and  the 
announcement  can  have  no  purpose  other  than  to  pass 
[  277  ] 


278  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

for  an  Excommunication  without  really  being  one  ;  as 
happened,  in  fact,  for  that  is  how  the  Edict  has  been 
understood. 

It  is  arbitrary,  for  it  accuses  only  me  of  disbelief  in 
all  the  points  enumerated  in  the  Edict ;  whereas  many, 
in  fact  almost  all  educated  people,  share  that  disbelief 
and  have  constantly  expressed  and  still  express  it  both 
in  conversations,  in  lectures,  in  pamphlets  and  in  books. 

It  is  unfounded  because  it  gives  as  a  chief  cause  of 
its  publication  the  great  circulation  of  the  false  teach- 
ing wherewith  I  pervert  the  people — whereas  I  am  well 
assured  that  hardly  a  hundred  people  can  be  found 
who  share  my  views,  and  the  circulation  of  my  writings 
on  religion,  thanks  to  the  Censor,  is  so  insignificant 
that  the  majority  of  those  who  have  read  the  Synod's 
Edict  have  not  the  least  notion  of  what  I  may  have 
written  about  religion — as  is  shown  by  the  letters  I 
have  received. 

It  contains  an  obvious  falsehood,  for  it  says  that 
efforts  have  been  made  by  the  Church  to  show  me  my 
errors,  but  that  these  efforts  have  been  unsuccessful. 
Nothing  of  the  kind  ever  took  place. 

It  constitutes  what  in  legal  terminology  is  called  a 
libel,  for  it  contains  assertions  known  to  be  false  and 
tending  to  my  hurt. 

It  is,  finally,  an  incentive  to  evil  feelings  and  deeds, 
for,  as  was  to  be  expected,  it  evoked,  in  unenlightened 
and  unreasoning  people,  anger  and  hatred  against  me, 
culminating  in  threats  of  murder  expressed  in  letters 
I  received.  One  writes  :  '  Now  thou  hast  been  anathe- 
matized, and  after  death  wilt  go  to  everlasting  torments, 
and  wilt  perish  like  a  dog  .  .  .  anathema  upon  thee, 
old  devil  ...  be  damned.'  Another  blames  the 
Government  for  not  having,  as  yet,  shut  me  up  in  a 
monastery,  and  fills  his  letter  with  abuse.  A  third 
writes  :  '  If  the  Government  does  not  get  rid  of  you, 
we  will  ourselves  make  you  shut  your  mouth,'  and  the 
letter  ends  with  curses.  (  May  you  be  destroyed — you 
blackguard  P  writes  a  fourth  ;  * 1  shall  find  means  to  do 
it  \  .  .    and  then  follows  indecent  abuse.     After  the 


REPLY  TO  THE  SYNOD'S  EDICT         279 

publication  of  the  Synod's  Edict  I  also  noticed  indica- 
tions of  anger  of  this  kind  in  some  of  the  people  I  met. 
On  the  very  day  (February  25)  when  the  Edict  was 
made  public,  while  crossing  a  public  square  I  heard 
the  words :  ( See  !  there  goes  the  devil  in  human  form,' 
and  had  the  crowd  been  composed  of  other  elements 
I  should  very  likely  have  been  beaten  to  death,  as 
happened  some  years  ago  to  a  man  at  the  Panteleymon 
Chapel. 

So  that,  altogether,  the  Synod's  Edict  is  very  bad  ; 
and  the  statement,  at  the  end,  that  those  who  sign  it 
pray  that  I  may  become  such  as  they  are,  does  not 
make  it  any  better. 

That  relates  to  the  Edict  as  a  whole  ;  as  to  details, 
it  is  wrong  in  the  following  particulars.  It  is  said  in 
the  Edict :  '  A  writer  well  known  to  the  world,  Russian 
by  birth,  Orthodox  by  baptism  and  education — Count 
Tolstoy — under  the  seduction  of  his  intellectual  pride 
has  insolently  risen  against  the  Lord  and  against  his 
Christ  and  against  his  holy  heritage,  and  has  pub- 
licly, in  the  sight  of  all  men,  renounced  the  Orthodox 
Mother  Church  which  has  reared  him  and  educated 
him.' 

That  I  have  renounced  the  Church  which  calls  itself 
Orthodox  is  perfectly  correct. 

But  I  renounced  it  not  because  I  had  risen  against  the 
Lord,  but,  on  the  contrary,  only  because  with  all  the 
strength  of  my  soul  I  wished  to  serve  him.  Before 
renouncing  the  Church,  and  fellowship  with  the  people 
which  was  inexpressibly  dear  to  me,  I — having  seen 
some  reasons  to  doubt  the  Church's  integrity — devoted 
several  years  to  the  investigation  of  its  theoretic  and  prac- 
tical teachings.  For  the  theory,  I  read  all  I  could  about 
Church  doctrine,  and  studied  and  critically  analyzed 
dogmatic  theology  ;  while  as  to  practice,  for  more  than 
a  year  I  followed  strictly  all  the  injunctions  of  the 
Church,  observing  all  the  fasts  and  all  the  services.  And 
I  became  convinced  that  Church  doctrine  is  theoreti- 
cally a  crafty  and  harmful  lie,  and  practically  a  collec- 
tion of  the  grossest  superstitions  and  sorcery,  which 


280  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

completely  conceals  the  whole  meaning  of  Christ's 
teaching.* 

And  I  really  repudiated  the  Church,  ceased  to  observe 
its  ceremonies,  and  wrote  a  will  instructing  those  near 
me,  that  when  I  die  they  should  not  allow  any  servants 
of  the  Church  to  have  access  to  me,  but  should  put  away 
my  dead  body  as  quickly  as  possible — without  having 
any  incantations  or  prayers  over  it — just  as  one  puts 
away  any  objectionable  and  useless  object,  that  it  may 
not  be  an  inconvenience  to  the  living. 

As  to  the  statements  made  about  me,  that  I  devote 
the  c  literary  activity  and  the  talent  given  to  him  by  God, 
to  disseminating  among  the  people  teachings  contrary 
to  Christ  and  to  the  Church,'  and  that,  '  in  his  works 
and  in  letters  issued  by  him  and  by  his  disciples  in 
great  quantities,  over  the  whole  world,  but  particularly 
within  the  limits  of  our  dear  fatherland,  he  preaches 
with  the  zeal  of  a  fanatic  the  overthrow  of  all  the 
dogmas  of  the  Orthodox  Church  and  the  very  essence 
of  the  Christian  faith' — this  is  not  true.  J  never 
troubled  myself  about  the  propagation  of  my  teaching. 
It  is  true  that  for  myself  I  have  expressed  in  writings 
my  understanding  of  Christ's  teaching,  and  have  not 
hidden  these  works  from  those  who  wished  to  become 
acquainted  with  them,   but  I  never  published   them 

*  One  need  only  read  the  Prayer- Book,  and  follow  the 
ritual  which  is  continually  performed  by  the  Orthodox 
priests,  and  which  is  considered  a  Christian  worship  of  God, 
to  see  that  all  these  ceremonies  are  nothing  but  different 
kinds  of  sorcery,  adapted  to  all  the  incidents  of  life. 
That  a  child  in  case  of  death  should  go  to  Paradise,  one 
has  to  know  how  to  oil  him  and  how  to  immerse  him  while 
pronouncing  certain  words  ;  in  order  that  after  child-birth 
a  mother  may  cease  to  be  unclean,  certain  incantations 
have  to  be  pronounced  ;  to  be  successful  in  one's  affairs,  to 
live  comfortably  in  a  new  house,  that  corn  may  grow  well, 
that  a  drought  may  cease,  to  recover  from  sickness,  to  ease 
the  condition  in  the  next  world  of  one  who  is  dying, — for 
all  these  and  a  thousand  other  incidents  there  are  certain 
incantations  which,  at  a  certain  place,  for  a  certain  con- 
sideration, are  pronounced  by  the  priest. — L.  T. 


REPLY  TO  THE  SYNOD'S  EDICT         281 

myself.  Only  when  they  have  asked  me  about  it,  have 
I  told  people  how  I  understand  Christ's  teaching.  To 
those  that  asked,  I  said  what  1  thought,  and  (when  I 
had  them)  gave  them  my  books. 

Then  it  is  said  that  '  he  denies  God  worshipped  in 
the  Holy  Trinity,  the  Creator  and  Protector  of  the 
universe ;  denies  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  God-man, 
Redeemer  and  Saviour  of  the  world,  who  suffered  for 
us  men  and  for  our  salvation,  and  was  raised  from  the 
dead  ;  denies  the  immaculate  conception  of  the  Lord 
Christ  as  man,  and  the  virginity  before  his  birth  and 
after  his  birth  of  the  Most  Pure  Mother  of  God/ 
That  I  deny  the  incomprehensible  Trinity ;  the  fable, 
which  is  altogether  meaningless  in  our  time,  of  the  fall 
of  the  first  man  ;  the  blasphemous  story  of  a  God  born 
of  a  virgin  to  redeem  the  human  race — is  perfectly 
true.  But  God,  a  Spirit ;  God,  love  ;  the  only  God — 
the  Source  of  all, — I  not  only  do  not  deny,  but  I 
attribute  real  existence  to  God  alone,  and  I  see  the 
whole  meaning  of  life  only  in  fulfilling  his  will,  which 
is  expressed  in  the  Christian  teaching. 

It  is  also  said :  e  He  does  not  acknowledge  a  life  and 
retribution  beyond  the  grave/  If  one  is  to  understand, 
by  life  beyond  the  grave,  the  Second  Advent,  a  hell 
with  eternal  torments,  devils,  and  a  Paradise  of  per- 
petual happiness — it  is  perfectly  true  that  I  do  not 
acknowledge  such  a  life  beyond  the  grave  ;  but  eternal 
life  and  retribution  here  and  everywhere,  now  and  for 
ever,  I  acknowledge  to  such  an  extent  that,  standing 
now,  at  my  age,  on  the  verge  of  my  grave,  I  often  have 
to  make  an  effort  to  restrain  myself  from  desiring  the 
death  of  this  body — that  is,  birth  to  a  new  life  ;  and  I 
believe  every  good  action  increases  the  true  welfare  of 
my  eternal  life,  and  every  evil  action  decreases  it. 

It  is  also  stated  that  I  reject  all  the  Sacraments. 
That  is  quite  true.  I  consider  all  the  Sacraments  to 
be  coarse,  degrading  sorcery,  incompatible  with  the 
idea  of  God  or  with  the  Christian  teaching,  and  also  as 
infringements  of  very  plain  injunctions  in  the  Gospels. 
In  the  Baptism  of  Infants  I  see  a  palpable  perversion  of 


282  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

the  whole  meaning  which  might  be  attached  to  the 
baptism  of  adults  who  consciously  accepted  Christ- 
ianity ;  in  the  performance  of  the  Sacrament  of  Mar- 
riage over  those  who  are  known  to  have  had  other 
sexual  unions,  in  the  permission  of  divorce,  and  in  the 
consecration  of  the  marriages  of  divorced  people,  I  see 
a  direct  infringement  both  of  the  meaning  and  of  the 
words  of  the  Gospel  teaching. 

In  the  periodical  absolution  of  sins  at  Confession  I 
see  a  harmful  deception,  which  only  encourages  im- 
morality and  causes  men  not  to  fear  to  sin. 

Both  in  Extreme  Unction  and  in  Anointing  I  see 
methods  of  gross  sorcery — as  in  the  worship  of  icons 
and  relics,  and  as  in  all  the  rites,  prayers  and  exorcisms 
which  fill  the  Prayer-Book.  In  the  Sacrament  I  see  a 
deification  of  the  flesh,  and  a  perversion  of  Christian 
teaching.  In  Ordination  I  see  (beside  an  obvious  pre- 
paration for  deception)  a  direct  infringement  of  the 
words  of  Jesus,  which  plainly  forbid  anyone  to  be  called 
teacher,  father,  or  master.* 

It  is  stated,  finally,  as  the  last  and  greatest  of  my 
sins,  that,  ( reviling  the  most  sacred  objects  of  the  faith 
of  the  Orthodox  people,  he  has  not  shrunk  from  sub- 
jecting to  derision  the  greatest  of  Sacraments,  the  Holy 
Eucharist. 't  That  I  did  not  shrink  from  describing 
simply  and  objectively  what  the  priest  does  when  pre- 
paring this  so-called  Sacrament  is  perfectly  true ;  but 
that  this  so-called  Sacrament  is  anything  holy,  and 
that  to  describe  it  simply,  just  as  it  is  performed,  is 
blasphemy,  is  quite  untrue.  Blasphemy  does  not  con- 
sist in  calling  a  partition  a  partition,  and  not  an  icono- 

*  Matt,  xxiii.  8-10 :  '  But  be  not  ye  called  Rabbi :  for 
one  is  your  teacher,  and  all  ye  are  brethren.  And  call  no 
man  your  father  on  the  earth  :  for  one  is  your  Father, 
which  is  in  heaven.  Neither  be  ye  called  masters  :  for  one 
is  your  Master,  even  the  Christ.' 

t  See  chapter  xxxix.,  book  i.,  of  Resurrection;  but  see 
also,  as  a  probable  provocative  of  Tolstoy's  Excommunica- 
tion, the  description  of  the  Head  of  the  Holy  Synod  in 
chapter  xxvii.,  book  ii.,  of  that  work. 


REPLY  TO  THE  SYNOD'S  EDICT  283 

stasis,*  and  a  cup  a  cup,  and  not  a  chalice,  etc.  ;  but  it 
is  a  most  terrible,  continual,  and  revolting  blasphemy 
that  men  (using  all  possible  means  of  deception  and 
hypnotization)  assure  children  and  simple-minded  folk 
that  if  bits  of  bread  are  cut  up  in  a  particular  manner 
while  certain  words  are  pronounced  over  them,  and  if 
they  are  put  into  wine,t  God  will  enter  into  those  bits 
of  oread,  and  any  living  person  named  by  the  priest 
when  he  takes  out  one  of  these  sops  will  be  healthy, 
and  any  dead  person  named  by  the  priest  when  he 
takes  out  one  of  these  sops  will  be  better  off  in  the 
other  world  on  that  account ;  and  that  into  the  man  who 
eats  such  a  sop — God  himself  will  enter. 

Surely  that  is  terrible  ! 

They  undertake  to  teach  us  to  understand  the  per- 
sonality of  Christ,  but  his  teaching,  which  destroys 
evil  in  the  world,  and  blesses  men  so  simply,  easily, 
and  undoubtedly,  if  only  they  do  not  pervert  it,  is  all 
hidden,  is  all  transformed  into  a  gross  sorcery  of  wash- 
ings, smearing  with  oil,  gestures,  exorcisms,  eating  of 
bits  of  bread,  etc.,  so  that  of  the  true  teaching  nothing 
remains.  And  if,  at  any  time,  some  one  tries  to  remind 
men  that  Christ's  teaching  consists  not  in  this  sorcery, 
not  in  public  prayer,  liturgies,  candles,  and  icons,  but 
in  loving  one  another,  in  not  returning  evil  for  evil, 
in  not  judging  or  killing  one  another — the  anger  of 
those  to  whom  deception  is  profitable  is  aroused,  and 
with  incomprehensible  audacity  they  publicly  declare 
in  churches,  and  print  in  books,  newspapers,  and 
catechisms,  that  Jesus  never  forbade  oaths  (swearing 
allegiance,  or  swearing  in  courts  of  law),  never  forbade 

*  The  iconostasis  in  Russo-Greek  churches  corresponds, 
somewhat,  both  to  the  Western  altar-rails  and  to  a  rood- 
screen. 

f  In  the  Greek  Church  the  priest  mixes  the  sacramental 
bread  with  the  wine  before  administering  it  to  the  com- 
municant. The  reader  will  note  in  this  article  allusions  to 
several  practices  (baptism  by  immersion,  unction,  etc.) 
which  do  not  exist,  or  are  differently  carried  out,  in  the 
Church  of  England. 


284  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

murder  (executions  and  wars),  and  that  the  teaching 
of  non-resistance  to  evil  has  with  Satanic  ingenuity  been 
invented  by  the  enemies  of  Christ.* 

What  is  most  terrible  is  that  people  to  whom  it  is 
profitable,  not  only  deceive  adults,  but  (having  power 
to  do  so)  deceive  children  also — those  very  children  con- 
cerning whom  Jesus  pronounced  woe  on  him  who  de- 
ceives them.  It  is  terrible  that  these  people  for  such 
petty  advantages  do  such  fearful  harm,  by  hiding  from 
men  the  truth  that  was  revealed  by  Jesus,  and  that  gives 
blessings  such  as  are  not  counterbalanced  even  to  the 
extent  of  a  one-thousandth  part  by  the  advantages 
these  men  secure  for  themselves.  They  behave  like  a 
robber  who  killed  a  whole  family  of  five  or  six  people 
to  carry  off  an  old  coat  and  tenpence  in  money.  They 
would  willingly  have  given  him  all  their  clothes  and  all 
their  money  not  to  be  killed ;  but  he  could  not  act 
otherwise. 

So  it  is  with  the  religious  deceivers.  It  would  be 
worth  while  keeping  them  ten  times  better,  and  letting 
them  live  in  the  greatest  luxury,  if  only  they  would 
refrain  from  ruining  men  with  their  deceptions.  But 
they  'cannot  act  differently.  That  is  what  is  awful. 
And,  therefore,  we  not  only  may,  but  should,  unmask 
their  deceptions.  If  there  be  a  sacred  thing,  it  is 
surely  not  what  they  call  Sacraments,  but  just  this 
very  duty  of  unmasking  their  religious  deceptions  when 
one  detects  them. 

When  a  Tchouvash  smears  his  idol  with  sour  cream, 
or  beats  it,  I  can  refrain  from  insulting  his  faith,  and 
can  pass  by  with  equanimity,  for  he  does  these  things 
in  the  name  of  a  superstition  of  his  own,  foreign  to  me, 
and  he  does  not  interfere  with  what  to  me  is  holy.  But 
when,  with  their  barbarous  superstitions,  men  (however 
numerous,  however  ancient  their  superstitions,  and 
however  powerful  they  may  be)  in  the  name  of  the  God 
by  whom  I  live,  and  of  that  teaching  of  Christ's  which 
has  given  life  to  me  and  is  capable  of  giving  life  to  all 
men,  preach  gross  sorcery,  I  cannot  endure  it  pas- 
*  Speech  by  Ambrosius,  Bishop  of  Kharkof. — L.  T. 


REPLY  TO  THE  SYNOD'S  EDICT         285 

sively.  And  if  I  call  what  they  are  doing  by  its  name, 
I  only  do  my  duty  and  what  I  cannot  refrain  from 
doing  because  I  believe  in  God  and  in  the  Christian 
teaching.  If  they  call  the  exposure  of  their  imposture 
1  blasphemy/  that  only  shows  the  strength  of  their 
deception,  and  should  increase  the  efforts  to  destroy  this 
deception,  made  by  those  who  believe  in  God  and  in 
Christ's  teaching,  and  who  see  that  this  deception  hides 
the  true  God  from  men's  sight. 

They  should  say  of  Christ — who  drove  bulls  and 
sheep  and  dealers  from  the  temple— that  he  blasphemed. 
Were  he  to  come  now,  and  see  what  is  done  in  his 
name  in  church,  he  would  surely,  with  yet  greater  and 
most  just  anger,  throw  out  all  these  horrible  altar- 
cloths,  *  lances,  crosses,  and  cups  and  candles  and  icons 
and  all  the  things  wherewith  the  priests— carrying  on 
their  sorcery — hide  God  and  his  truth  from  mankind. 

So  that  is  what  is  true  and  what  is  untrue  in  the 
Synod's  Edict  about  me.  I  certainly  do  not  believe 
in  what  they  say  they  believe  in.  But  I  believe  in 
much  they  wish  to  persuade  people  that  I  dis- 
believe in. 

I  believe  in  this  :  I  believe  in  God,  whom  I  understand 
as  Spirit,  as  Love,  as  the  Source  of  all.  I  believe  that 
he  is  in  me  and  I  in  him.  I  believe  that  the  will  of 
God  is  most  clearly  and  intelligibly  expressed  in  the 
teaching  of  the  man  Jesus,  whom  to  consider  as  God, 
and  pray  to,  I  esteem  the  greatest  blasphemy.  I 
believe  that  man's  true  welfare  lies  in  fulfilling  God's 
will,  and  his  will  is  that  men  should  love  one  another, 
and  should  consequently  do  to  others  as  they  wish 
others  to  do  to  them — of  which  it  is  said  in  the  Gospels 
that  in  this  is  the  law  and  the  prophets.  I  believe, 
therefore,  that  the  meaning  of  the  life  of  every  man  is 
to  be  found  only  in  increasing  the  love  that  is  in  him  ; 

*  The  altar-cloths  referred  to  are  those  containing  frag- 
ments of  holy  relics,  on  which  alone  mass  can  be  celebrated. 
The  '  lances  '  are  diminutive  ones  with  which  the  priest  cuts 
bits  out  of  the  holy  bread,  in  remembrance  of  the  lance  that 
pierced  Christ's  side. 


286  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

that  this  increase  of  love  leads  man,  even  in  this  life, 
to  ever  greater  and  greater  blessedness,  and  after  death 
gives  him  the  more  blessedness  the  more  love  he 
has,  and  helps  more  than  anything  else  towards  the 
establishment  of  the  Kingdom  of  God  on  earth  :  that 
is,  to  the  establishment  of  an  order  of  life  in  which  the 
discord,  deception  and  violence  that  now  rule  will  be 
replaced  by  free  accord,  by  truth,  and  by  the  brotherly 
love  of  one  for  another.  I  believe  that  to  obtain  pro- 
gress in  love  there  is  only  one  means :  prayer — not 
public  prayer  in  churches,  plainly  forbidden  by  Jesus,* 
but  private  prayer,  like  the  sample  given  them  by  Jesus, 
consisting  of  the  renewing  and  strengthening,  in  their 
consciousness,  of  the  meaning  of  life  and  of  their 
dependence  solely  on  the  will  of  God. 

Whether  these  beliefs  of  mine  offend,  grieve,  or 
prove  a  stumbling-block  to  anyone,  or  hinder  anything, 
or  give  displeasure  to  anybody,  or  not,  I  can  as  little 
change  them  as  I  can  change  my  body.  I  must  myself 
live  my  own  life,  and  I  must  myself  alone  meet  death 
(and  that  very  soon),  and  therefore  I  cannot  believe 
otherwise  than  as  I— preparing  to  go  to  that  God  from 
whom  I  came — do  believe.  I  do  not  believe  my  faith 
to  be  the  one  indubitable  truth  for  all  time,  but  I  see 
no  other  that  is  plainer,  clearer,  or  answers  better  to  all 
the  demands  of  my  reason  and  my  heart ;  should  I  find 
such  a  one,  I  shall  at  once  accept  it ;  for  God  requires 
nothing  but  the  truth.     But  I  can  no  more  return  to 

*  '  And  when  ye  pray,  ye  shall  not  be  as  the  hypocrites  : 
for  they  love  to  stand  and  pray  in  the  synagogues  and  in 
the  corners  of  the  streets,  that  they  may  be  seen  of  men. 
Verily  I  say  unto  you,  They  have  received  their  reward. 
But  thou,  when  thou  prayest,  enter  into  thine  inner 
chamber,  and  having  shut  thy  door,  pray  to  thy  Father 
which  is  in  secret,  and  thy  Father  which  seeth  in  secret 
shall  recompense  thee.  And  in  praying  use  not  vain  repe- 
titions, as  the  Gentiles  do :  for  they  think  that  they  shall 
be  heard  for  their  much  speaking.  Be  not  therefore  like 
unto  them  :  for  your  Father  knoweth  what  things  ye  have 
need  of,  before  ye  ask  him.  After  this  manner  therefore 
pray  ye  :  Our  Father,'  etc. — Matt.  vi.  5-13. 


REPLY  TO  THE  SYNOD'S  EDICT         287 

that  from  which,  with  such  suffering,  I  have  escaped, 
than  a  flying  bird  can  re-enter  the  eggshell  from  which 
it  has  emerged. 

r  He  who  begins  by  loving  Christianity  better  than 
truth,  will  proceed  by  loving  his  own  sect  or  church 
better  than  Christianity,  and  end  in  loving  himself  (his 
own  peace)  better  than  all,'  said  Coleridge. 

I  travelled  the  contrary  way.  I  began  by  loving  my 
Orthodox  faith  more  than  my  peace,  then  I  loved 
Christianity  more  than  my  Church,  and  now  I  love 
truth  more  than  anything  in  the  world.  And  up  to 
now,  truth,  for  me,  corresponds  with  Christianity  as  1 
understand  it.  And  I  hold  to  this  Christianity ;  and 
to  the  degree  in  which  I  hold  to  it  I  live  peacefully  and 
happily,  and  peacefully  and  happily  approach  death. 

[April  4,  o.s.,  1901.] 


XXIII 

WHAT  IS  RELIGION,  AND  WHEREIN  LIES  ITS 
ESSENCE  ? 


In  all  human  societies,  at  certain  periods  of  their  exist- 
ence, a  time  has  come  when  religion  has  first  swerved 
from  its  original  purpose,  then,  diverging  more  and 
more,  it  has  lost  sight  of  that  purpose,  and  has  finally 
petrified  into  fixed  forms,  so  that  its  influence  on  men's 
lives  has  become  ever  less  and  less. 

At  such  times  the  educated  minority  cease  to  believe 
in  the  established  religious  teaching,  and  only  pretend 
to  hold  it  because  they  think  it  necessary  to  do  so  in 
order  to  keep  the  mass  of  the  people  to  the  established 
order  of  life ;  but  the  mass  of  the  people,  though  by 
inertia  they  keep  to  the  established  forms  of  religion, 
no  longer  guide  their  lives  by  its  demands,  but  guide 
them  only  by  custom  and  by  the  State  laws. 

That  is  what  has  repeatedly  occurred  in  various 
human  societies.  But  what  is  now  happening  in  our 
Christian  society  has  never  happened  before.  It  never 
before  happened  that  the  rich,  ruling,  and  more 
educated  minority,  which  has  the  most  influence  on 
the  masses,  not  only  disbelieved  the  existing  religion, 
but  was  convinced  that  no  religion  at  all  is  any  longer 
needed,  and,  instead  of  influencing  those  who  are 
doubtful  of  the  truth  of  the  generally  professed 
religion  to  accept  some  religious  teaching  more 
rational  and  clear  than  the  prevalent  one,  influenced 
them  to  regard  religion  in  general  as  a  thing  that  has 
[  288  ] 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION?  289 

outlived  its  day,  and  is  now  not  merely  a  useless,  but 
even  a  harmful,  social  organ,  like  the  vermiform 
appendix  in  the  human  body. 

Religion  is  regarded  by  such  men,  not  as  something 
known  to  us  by  inward  experience,  but  as  an  external 
phenomenon— a  disease,  as  it  were,  which  overtakes 
certain  people,  and  which  we  can  only  investigate  by 
its  external  symptoms. 

Religion,  in  the  opinion  of  some  of  these  men,  arose 
from  attributing  a  spirit  to  various  aspects  of  Nature 
(animism) ;  in  the  opinion  of  others,  it  arose  from  the 
supposed  possibility  of  communicating  with  deceased 
ancestors  ;  in  the  opinion  of  others,  again,  it  arose  from 
fear  of  the  forces  of  Nature.  But,  say  the  learned  men 
of  our  day,  since  science  has  now  proved  that  trees  and 
stones  cannot  be  endowed  with  a  spirit ;  that  dead 
ancestors  do  not  know  what  is  done  by  the  living  ;  and 
that  the  aspects  of  Nature  are  explainable  by  natural 
causes— it  follows  that  the  need  for  religion  has  passed, 
as  well  as  the  need  for  all  those  restrictions  with  which, 
(in  consequence  of  religious  beliefs)  people  have  hitherto 
hampered  themselves.  In  the  opinion  of  these  learned 
men  there  was  a  period  of  ignorance  :  the  religious 
period.  That  has  long  been  outlived  by  humanity, 
though  some  occasional  atavistic  indications  of  it  still 
remain.  Then  came  the  metaphysical  period,  which  is 
now  also  outlived.  But  we,  enlightened  people,  are 
living  in  a  scientific  period  :  a  period  of  positive  science 
which  replaces  religion  and  will  bring  humanity  to  a 
height  of  development  it  could  never  have  reached 
while  subject  to  the  superstitious  teachings  of  religion. 

Early  in  1901  the  distinguished  French  savant 
Berthelot  delivered  a  speech*  in  which  he  told  his 
hearers  that  the  day  of  religion  has  passed  and  religion 
must  now  be  replaced  by  science.  I  refer  to  this 
speech  because  it  is  the  first  to  my  hand,  and  because 
it  was  delivered  in  the  metropolis  of  the  educated  world 
by  a  universally  recognised  savant.     But  the  same 

*  See  the  Revue  de  Paris,  January,  1901. 

T 


290  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

thought  is  continually  and  ubiquitously  expressed  in 
every  form,  from  philosophic  treatises  down  to  news- 
paper feuilletons. 

M.  Berthelot  says  in  that  speech,  that  there  were 
formerly  two  motors  moving  humanity :  Force  and 
Religion ;  but  that  these  motors  have  now  become 
superfluous,  for  in  their  place  we  have  science.  By 
science  M.  Berthelot  (like  all  devotees  of  science) 
evidently  means  a  science  embracing  the  whole  range 
of  things  man  knows,  harmoniously  united,  co-ordi- 
nated, and  in  command  of  such  methods  that  the  data 
it  obtains  are  unquestionably  true.  But  as  no  such 
science  really  exists — and  what  is  now  called  science 
consists  of  a  collection  of  haphazard,  disconnected 
scraps  of  knowledge,  many  of  them  quite  useless,  and 
such  as,  instead  of  supplying  undoubted  truth,  very 
frequently  supply  the  grossest  delusions,  exhibited  as 
truth  to-day,  but  refuted  to-morrow — it  is  evident 
that  the  thing  M.  Berthelot  thinks  must  replace 
religion  is  something  non-existent.  Consequently  the 
assertion  made  by  M.  Berthelot  and  by  those  who  agree 
with  him,  to  the  effect  that  science  will  replace  religion, 
is  quite  arbitrary,  and  rests  on  a  quite  unjustifiable  faith 
in  the  infallibility  of  science — a  faith  similar  to  the 
belief  in  an  infallible  Church. 

Yet  men  who  are  said  to  be,  and  who  consider  them- 
selves to  be,  educated,  are  quite  convinced  that  a 
science  already  exists  which  should  and  can  replace 
religion,  and  which  even  has  already  replaced  it. 

e  Religion  is  obsolete  :  belief  in  anything  but  science 
is  ignorance.  Science  will  arrange  all  that  is  needful, 
and  one  must  be  guided  in  life  by  science  alone.'  This 
is  what  is  thought  and  said  both  by  scientists  them- 
selves and  also  by  those  men  of  the  crowd  who,  though 
far  from  scientific,  believe  in  the  scientists  and  join 
them  in  asserting  that  religion  is  an  obsolete  supersti- 
tion, and  that  we  must  be  guided  in  life  by  science 
only  :  that  is,  in  reality,  by  nothing  at  all ;  for  science, 
by  reason  of  its  very  aim  (which  is  to  study  all  that 
exists),  can  afford  no  guidance  for  the  life  of  man. 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION  ?  291 


The  learned  men  of  our  times  have  decided  that 
religion  is  not  wanted,  and  that  science  will  replace  it, 
or  has  already  done  so  ;  but  the  fact  remains  that,  now 
as  formerly,  no  human  society  and  no  rational  man  has 
existed  or  can  exist  without  a  religion.  I  use  the 
term  rational  man  because  an  irrational  man  may  live, 
as  the  beasts  do,  without  a  religion.  But  a  rational 
man  cannot  live  without  one  ;  for  only  religion  gives  a 
rational  man  the  guidance  he  needs,  telling  him  what 
he  should  do,  and  what  first  and  what  next.  A  rational 
man  cannot  live  without  religion,  precisely  because 
reason  is  characteristic  of  his  nature.  Every  animal  is 
guided  in  its  actions  (apart  from  those  to  which  it  is 
impelled  by  the  need  to  satisfy  its  immediate  desires) 
by  a  consideration  of  the  direct  results  of  its  actions. 
Having  considered  those  results  by  such  means  of  com- 
prehension as  it  possesses,  an  animal  makes  its  actions 
conform  to  those  consequences,  and  it  always  unhesita- 
tingly acts  in  one  and  the  same  way,  in  accord  with 
those  considerations.  A  bee,  for  instance,  flies  for 
honey  and  stores  it  in  the  hive  because  in  winter  it 
will  need  food  for  itself  and  for  the  young,  and  beyond 
these  considerations  it  knows,  and  can  know,  nothing. 
So  also  a  bird  is  influenced  when  it  builds  its  nest,  or 
migrates  from  the  north  to  the  south  and  back  again. 
Every  animal  acts  in  a  like  way  when  it  does  anything 
not  resulting  from  direct,  immediate  necessity,  but 
prompted  by  considerations  of  anticipated  results. 
With  man,  however,  it  is  not  so.  The  difference 
between  a  man  and  an  animal  lies  in  the  fact  that  the 
perceptive  capacities  possessed  by  an  animal  are  limited 
to  what  we  call  instinct,  whereas  man's  fundamental 
perceptive  capacity  is  reason.  A  bee,  collecting  honey, 
can  have  no  doubts  as  to  whether  it  is  good  or  bad  to 
collect  honey ;  but  a  man  gathering  in  his  corn  or  fruit 
cannot  but  consider  whether  he  is  diminishing  the 
prospects  of  obtaining  future  harvests,  and  whether  he 
is  not  depriving  his  neighbour  of  food.     Nor  can  he 

t  2 


292  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

help  wondering  what  the  children  whom  he  now  feeds 
will  become  like — and  much  else.  The  most  important 
questions  of  conduct  in  life  cannot  be  solved  con- 
clusively by  a  reasonable  man,  just  because  there  is 
such  a  superabundance  of  possible  consequences  which 
he  cannot  but  be  aware  of.  Every  rational  man  knows, 
or  at  least  feels,  that  in  the  most  important  questions 
of  life  he  can  guide  himself  neither  by  personal  impulses, 
nor  by  considerations  of  the  immediate  consequences 
of  his  activity — for  the  consequences  he  foresees  are 
too  numerous  and  too  various,  and  are  often  contradic- 
tory one  to  another,  being  as  likely  to  prove  harmful 
as  beneficial  to  himself  and  to  other  people.  There  is 
a  legend  which  tells  of  an  angel  who  descended  to 
earth  and,  entering  a  devout  family,  slew  a  child  in 
its  cradle ;  when  asked  why  he  did  so,  he  explained 
that  the  child  would  have  become  the  greatest  of  male- 
factors, and  would  have  destroyed  the  happiness  of  the 
family.  But  it  is  thus  not  only  with  the  question, 
Which  human  lives  are  useful,  useless,  or  harmful? 
None  of  the  most  important  questions  of  life  can 
a  reasonable  man  decide  by  considerations  of  their 
immediate  results  and  consequences.  A  reasonable 
man  cannot  be  satisfied  with  the  considerations  that 
guide  the  actions  of  an  animal.  A  man  may  regard 
himself  as  an  animal  among  animals — living  for  the 
passing  day  ;  or  he  may  consider  himself  as  a  member 
of  a  family,  a  society,  or  a  nation,  living  for  centuries  ; 
or  he  may,  and  even  must  necessarily  (for  reason  irre- 
sistibly prompts  him  to  this)  consider  himself  as  part 
of  the  whole  infinite  universe  existing  eternally.  And 
therefore  reasonable  men  should  do,  and  always  have 
done,  in  reference  to  the  infinitely  small  affairs  of  life 
affecting  their  actions,  what  in  mathematics  is  called 
integrate :  that  is  to  say,  they  must  set  up,  besides  their 
relation  to  the  immediate  facts  of  life,  a  relation  to  the 
whole  immense  Infinite  in  time  and  space,  conceived  as 
one  whole.  And  such  establishment  of  man's  relation 
to  that  whole  of  which  he  feels  himself  to  be  a  part, 
from  which  he  draws  guidance  for  his  actions,  is  what 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION  ?  293 

has  been  called,  and  is  called,  Religion.  And  there- 
fore religion  always  has  been,  and  cannot  cease  to  be, 
a  necessary  and  an  indispensable  condition  of  the  life 
of  a  reasonable  man  and  of  all  reasonable  humanity. 


That  is  how  religion  has  always  been  understood  by 
men  who  were  not  devoid  of  the  highest  (that  is,  re- 
ligious) consciousness,  which  distinguishes  man  from 
the  beasts.  The  word  religion  itself  comes  either  from 
relegere,  religens,  revering  the  Gods ;  or,  as  has  been 
commonly  supposed,  from  religare,  to  bind  (in  obligation 
to  the  higher  powers).  The  oldest  and  most  common 
definition  of  religion  is  that  religion  is  the  link  between 
man  and  God,  '  Les  obligations  de  Vhomme  enver  Dieu  : 
voild  la  religion3  (Man's  obligations  to  God  :  that  is 
religion)  says  Vauvenargues.*  A  similar  meaning  is  given 
to  religion  by  Schleiermachert  and  by  Feuerbach,J 
who  acknowledge  the  basis  of  religion  to  be  mans 
consciousness  of  his  dependence  on  God.  f  La  religion  est 
une  affaire  entre  chaque  homme  et  Dieu '  (Religion  is  a 
matter  between  each  man  and  God). — Bayle.§  c  La 
religion  est  le  resultat  des  besoins  de  fame  et  des  effets  de 
I9 intelligence '  (Religion  is  the  outcome  of  the  needs  of 
the  soul  and  of  the  effects  of  intelligence). — B.  Con- 
stant. ||     'Religion  is  a  particular  means  by  which  man 

*  Luc  de  Clapiers,  Marquis  de  Vauvenargues  (1715-1747), 
author  of  Introduction  a  la  Connaissance  de  V Esprit  humain, 
and  of  Reflexions  and  Maximes. 

f  Friedrich  E.  D.  Schleiermacher  (1768-1834),  author  of 
Der  Christliche  Glaube  and  many  other  theological  works. 

\  L.  A.  Feuerbach  (1804-1872),  author  of  Das  Wesen  des 
Ohristenthums  (which  was  translated  into  English  by 
George  Eliot). 

§  Pierre  Bayle  (1647-1706),  author  of  the  Dictionnaire 
historique  et  critique,  which  exercised  a  great  influence, 
especially  on  the  Continent,  during  the  eighteenth  century. 

||  Henri  Benjamin  Constant  de  Rtbeoue  (1767-1830), 
politician,  and  author  of  De  la  Religion. 


294  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

realizes  his  relation  with  the  superhuman  and  mysterious 
forces  on  which  he  conside?'s  himself  dependent.' — Goblet 
cPAlviella.*  i  Religion  is  a  definition  of  human  life, 
based  on  the  connection  between  the  human  soul  and  that 
mysterious  spirit  whose  dominion  over  the  world  and  over 
himself  man  recognises,  and  with  which  he  feels  himself 
united.' — A.  Reville.f 

So  that  the  essence  of  religion  has  always  been 
understood— and  is  now  understood  by  men  not  de- 
prived of  the  highest  human  characteristic — to  be  the 
establishment  by  man  of  a  relation  between  himself 
and  the  infinite  Being  or  Beings,  whose  power  he  feels 
over  him.  And  this  relation — however  different  it  may 
be  for  different  nations  and  at  different  times— has 
always  defined  for  men  their  destiny  in  the  world  ; 
from  which  guidance  for  their  conduct  has  naturally 
flowed.  A  Jew  understood  his  relation  to  the  Infinite 
to  be,  that  he  was  a  member  of  a  nation  chosen  by  God 
from  among  all  nations,  and  that  he  had  therefore  to 
observe  in  the  sight  of  God  the  agreement  made  by 
God  with  this  people.  A  Greek  understood  his  relation 
to  be,  that,  being  dependent  on  the  representatives  of 
eternity — i.e.,  on  the  Gods — he  ought  to  do  what 
pleased  them.  A  Brahman  understands  himself  to  be 
a  manifestation  of  the  infinite  Brahma,  and  considers 
that  he  ought,  by  renunciation  of  life,  to  strive  towards 
union  with  that  highest  being.  A  Buddhist  considered, 
and  considers,  his  relation  to  the  Infinite  to  be  :  that, 
passing  from  one  form  of  life*  to  another,  he  inevitably 
suffers  ;  and  these  sufferings  proceed  from  passions  and 
desires,  and  therefore  his  business  is  to  strive  to  anni- 
hilate all  passions  and  all  desires,  and  so  pass  into 
Nirvana.  Every  religion  is  the  setting  up,  between 
man  and  the  infinite  life  to  which  he  feels  himself 
allied,  of  some  relation  from  which  he  obtains  guidance 
for  his  conduct.     And,  therefore,  if  a  religion  does  not 

*  Eugene  Goblet,  Corate  d'Alviella  (1846-  ),  author  of 
Evolution  religieuse  contemporainc  and  other  works. 

+  A.  Reville  (1826-  ),  Protestant  theologian  of  the 
advanced  school,  author  of  many  works  on  religion. 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION?  295 

establish  any  relation  between  man  and  t)  :  fnfinite 
(as,  for  instance,  is  the  case  with  idolatry  01  -orcery), 
then  it  is  not  a  real  religion,  but  only  a  degeneration. 
If,  even,  religion  establishes  some  relation  between 
man  and  God,  but  does  this  by  means  of  assertions  not 
accordant  with  reason  and  present-day  knowledge,  so 
that  one  cannot  really  believe  the  assertions — that  also 
is  not  a  religion,  but  only  a  counterfeit.  If  a  religion 
does  not  unite  the  life  of  man  with  the  infinite  life, 
again  it  is  not  a  religion.  Nor  does  a  belief  in  proposi- 
tions from  which  no  definite  direction  for  human 
activity  results  constitute  a  religion. 

True  religion  is  a  relation,  accordant  with  reason 
and  knowledge,  which  man  establishes  with  the  infinite  life 
surrounding  him,  and  it  is  such  as  binds  his  life  to  that 
infinity,  and  guides  his  conduct. 


Though  there  never  was  an  age  when,  or  a  place 
where,  men  lived  without  a  religion,  yet  the  learned 
men  of  to-day  say,  like  Moliere's  *  Involuntary  Doctor ' 
who  asserted  that  the  liver  is  on  the  left  side :  Nous 
avons  change  tout  cela  (We  have  changed  all  that) ;  and 
they  think  that  we  can  and  should  live  without  any 
religion.  But,  nevertheless,  religion  remains  what  it 
has  been  in  the  past :  the  chief  motor  and  heart  of 
human  societies  ;  and  without  it,  as  without  a  heart, 
huma^i  life  is  impossible.  There  have  been,  and  there 
are,  many  different  religions — for  the  expression  of 
man's  relation  to  the  Infinite  and  to  God,  or  to  the 
Gods,  differs  at  different  times  and  in  different  places, 
according  to  the  stages  of  development  of  different 
nations — but  never  in  any  society  of  men,  since  men 
first  became  rational  creatures,  could  they  live,  or  have 
they  lived,  without  a  religion. 

It  is  true  that  there  have  been,  and  sometimes  are, 
periods  in  the  life  of  nations  when  the  existing  religion 
has  been  so  perverted  and  has  lagged  so  far  behind  life 
as  to  cease  to  guide  it.  But  this  cessation  of  its  action 
on  men's  lives  (occurring  at  times  in  all  religions)  has 


296  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

been  but  temporary.  It  is  characteristic  of  religion — 
as  of  all  that  is  really  alive — that  it  is  born,  develops, 
grows  old,  dies  and  again  comes  to  life,  and  comes  to 
life  ever  in  forms  more  perfect  than  before.  After  a 
period  of  higher  development  in  religion,  a  period 
of  decrepitude  and  lifelessness  always  follows,  to  be 
usually  succeeded  in  its  turn  by  a  period  of  regenera- 
tion, and  the  establishment  of  a  religious  doctrine 
wiser  and  clearer  than  before.  Such  periods  of  develop- 
ment, decrepitude,  and  regeneration  have  occurred  in 
all  religions.  In  the  profound  religion  of  Brahmanism, 
as  soon  as  it  began  to  grow  old  and  to  petrify  into 
fixed  and  coarse  forms  not  suited  to  it9  fundamental 
meaning,  came  on  one  side  a  renascence  of  Brah- 
manism itself,  and  on  the  other  the  lofty  teachings  of 
Buddhism,  which  advanced  humanity's  comprehension 
of  its  relation  to  the  Infinite.  A  similar  decline 
occurred  in  the  Greek  and  Roman  religions,  and  then, 
following  the  lowest  depths  of  that  decline,  appeared 
Christianity.  The  same  thing  occurred  again  with 
Church-Christianity,  which  in  Byzantium  degenerated 
into  idfolatry  and  polytheism.  To  counterbalance  this 
perverted  Christianity  there  arose,  on  one  hand,  the 
Paulicians,*  and  on  the  other  (in  opposition  to  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity  and  to  Mariolatry)  came  strict 
Mohammedanism  with  its  fundamental  dogma  of  One 
God.  The  same  thing  happened  again  with  Papal 
Mediaeval  Christianity,  which  evoked  the  Reforma- 
tion, so  that  periods  when  religion  weakens  in  its 
influence  on  the  majority  of  men  are  a  necessary  con- 
dition of  the  life  and  development  of  all  religious 
teachings.  This  occurs  because  every  religious  teach- 
ing in  its  true  meaning,  however  crude  it  may  be, 
always  establishes  a  relation  between  man  and  the 
Infinite,  which  is  alike  for  all  men.  Every  religion 
regards   men    as    equally   insignificant    compared    to 

*  The  Paulicians  were  a  sect  who  played  a  great  part  in 
the  history  of  the  Eastern  Church  (seventh  to  twelfth 
centuries).  They  rejected  the  Church  view  of  Christ's 
teaching,  and  were  cruelly  persecuted. 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION  ?  297 

Infinity  ;  and  therefore  every  religion  contains  the 
conception  of  the  equality  of  all  men  before  that  which 
it  regards  as  God  :  whether  that  be  lightning,  wind,  a 
tree,  an  animal,  a  hero,  or  a  deceased — or  even  a 
living — king  (as  occurred  in  Rome).  So  that  the 
admission  of  the  equality  of  man,  is  an  inevitable  and 
fundamental  characteristic  of  every  religion.  But  as 
equality  among  men  never  has  existed  anywhere  in 
actual  life,  and  does  not  now  exist,  it  has  happened 
that  as  soon  as  a  new  religious  teaching  appeared 
(always  including  a  confession  of  equality  among  all 
men*)  then  at  once  those  people  for  whom  inequality 
was  profitable  tried  to  hide  this  essential  feature  by 
perverting  the  teaching  itself.  So  it  has  happened 
always,  wherever  a  new  religious  teaching  appeared. 
And  this  has  been  done  for  the  most  part  not  con- 
sciously, but  merely  because  those  to  whom  inequality 
was  profitable — the  rulers  and  the  rich — in  order  to 
feel  themselves  justified  by  the  teaching  without  having 
to  alter  their  position,  have  tried  by  all  means  to 
fasten  upon  the  religious  teaching  an  interpretation 
sanctioning  inequality.  And,  naturally,  a  religion  so 
perverted  that  those  who  lorded  it  over  others  could 
consider  themselves  justified  in  so  doing — when  passed 
on  to  the  common  people,  instilled  into  them  also  the 
idea  that  submission  to  those  who  exercise  authority  is 
demanded  by  the  religion  they  profess. 


All  human  activity  is  evoked  by  three  motive  causes  : 
Feeling,  Reason,  and  Suggestion,  the  last-named  being 
the  same  thing  that  doctors  call  hypnotism.  Some- 
times man  acts  only  under  the  influence  of  feeling — 
simply  striving  to  get  what  he  desires.  Sometimes  he 
acts  solely  under  the  influence  of  reason,  which  shows 

*  That  is  to  say  that  all  are  equal  in  the  sight  of  God ; 
that  human  laws  and  customs  should  give  them  an  equal 
right  to  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness ;  and 
that  men  should  treat  one  another  as  brothers. 


298  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

him  what  he  ought  to  do.  Sometimes,  and  most  fre- 
quently, man  acts  because  he  himself  has,  or  other 
people  have,  suggested  an  activity  to  him,  and  he  un- 
consciously submits  to  the  suggestion.  Under  normal 
conditions  of  life  all  three  influences  play  their  part  in 
prompting  a  man's  activity.  Feeling  draws  him 
towards  a  certain  activity ;  reason  judges  of  this 
activity  in  the  light  of  present  circumstances,  as  well 
as  by  past  experience  and  future  expectation  ;  and 
suggestion  causes  a  man,  apart  from  feeling  and  reason, 
to  carry  out  the  actions  evoked  by  feeling  and  approved 
by  reason.  Were  there  no  feeling,  man  would  under- 
take nothing  ;  if  reason  did  not  exist,  man  would  yield 
at  once  to  many  contradictory  feelings,  harmful  to  him- 
self and  to  others  ;  were  there  no  capacity  of  yielding 
to  one's  own  or  other  people's  suggestion,  man  would 
have  unceasingly  to  experience  the  feeling  that  promp- 
ted him  to  a  particular  activity,  and  to  keep  his  reason 
continually  intent  on  the  verification  of  the  expediency 
of  that  feeling.  And,  therefore,  all  these  three  in- 
fluences are  indispensable  for  even  the  simplest  human 
activity.  If  a  man  walks  from  one  place  to  another, 
this  occurs  because  feeling  has  impelled  him  to  move 
from  one  place  to  another  ;  reason  has  approved  of  this 
intention  and  dictated  means  for  its  accomplishment 
(in  this  case — stepping  along  a  certain  road),  and  the 
muscles  of  the  body  obey,  and  the  man  moves  along 
the  road  indicated.  While  he  is  going  along,  both  his 
feeling  and  his  reason  are  freed  for  other  activity,  which 
could  not  be  the  case  but  for  his  capacity  to  submit  to 
suggestion.  This  is  what  happens  with  all  human 
activities,  and  among  the  rest  with  the  most  important 
of  them  :  religious  activity.  Feeling  evokes  the  need 
to  establish  a  man's  relation  to  God  ;  reason  defines  that 
relation  ;  and  suggestion  impels  man  to  the  activity 
flowing  from  that  relation.  But  this  is  so,  only  as  long 
as  religion  remains  unperverted.  As  soon  as  perversion 
commences,  the  part  played  by  suggestion  grows  ever 
stronger  and  stronger,  and  the  activity  of  feeling  and 
of  reason  weakens.      The  methods  of  suggestion  are 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION  ?  299 

always  and  everywhere  the  same.  They  consist  in 
taking  advantage  of  man  at  times  when  he  is  most  sus- 
ceptible to  suggestion  (during  childhood,  and  at  impor- 
tant occurrences  of  life  :  deaths,  births,  or  marriages), 
and  then  acting  on  him  by  means  of  art :  architecture, 
sculpture,  painting,  music,  and  dramatic  performances, 
and,  while  he  is  in  a  condition  of  receptivity  (com- 
parable to  that  produced  on  individuals  by  semi- 
hypnotization),  instilling  into  him  whatever  the 
suggestors  wish. 

This  process  may  be  observed  in  all  ancient  religions  : 
in  the  lofty  religion  of  Brahmanism  degenerating  into 
gross  idolatry  of  multitudinous  images  in  various 
temples,  accompanied  by  singing  and  the  smoke  of 
incense  ;  in  the  ancient  Hebrew  religion  preached  by 
the  prophets,  changing  into  a  worship  of  God  in  a 
gorgeous  temple  with  ostentatious  songs  and  proces- 
sions ;  in  the  lofty  religion  of  Buddhism,  transforming 
itself — with  its  monasteries  and  images  of  Buddhaand  in- 
numerable ostentatious  rites — into  impenetrable  Lama- 
ism  ;  and  in  Taoism  with  its  sorcery  and  incantations. 

Always,  in  all  religious  teachings  when  they  began  to 
be  perverted,  their  guardians,  having  brought  men  into 
a  state  in  which  their  reason  acted  but  feebly,  employed 
every  effort  to  suggest,  and  instil  into  men,  whatever 
they  wished  them  to  believe.  And  in  all  religions  it 
was  found  necessary  to  suggest  the  same  three  things, 
which  serve  as  a  basis  for  all  the  perversions  to  which  a 
degenerating  religion  is  exposed.  First,  it  is  suggested 
that  there  are  men  of  a  particular  kind,  who  alone  can 
act  as  intermediaries  between  man  and  God  (or  the 
Gods)  ;  secondly,  that  miracles  have  been,  and  are,  per- 
formed, proving  and  confirming  the  truth  of  what  is 
told  by  these  intermediaries  between  man  and  God  ; 
and  thirdly,  that  there  are  certain  words — repeated 
verbally,  or  written  in  books — which  express  the  un- 
alterable will  of  God  (or  of  the  Gods),  and  which  are 
therefore  sacred  and  infallible.  And  as  soon  as,  under 
the  influence  of  hypnotism,  these  propositions  are 
accepted,  then  also  all  that  the  intermediaries  between 


300  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

man  and  God  say,  is  also  accepted  as  sacred  truth,  and 
the  chief  aim  of  the  perversion  of  religion  is  attained, 
namely :  the  concealment  of  the  law  of  human  equality, 
and  even  the  establishment  and  assertion  of  the  greatest 
inequality  ;  the  separation  into  castes,  the  separation 
into  chosen  people  and  Gentiles,  into  orthodox  and 
heretics,  saints  and  sinners.  This  very  thing  has 
occurred  and  is  occurring  in  Christianity  :  complete 
inequality  among  men  has  been  admitted,  and  they  are 
divided,  not  only,  with  reference  to  their  comprehen- 
sion of  the  teaching,  into  clerics  and  laity,  but,  with 
reference  to  social  position,  into  those  who  have  power 
and  those  who  ought  to  submit  to  power — which,  in 
accord  with  the  teaching  of  Paul,  is  acknowledged  as 
having  been  ordained  of  God. 


Inequality  among  men,  not  only  as  clergy  and  laity, 
but  also  as  rich  and  poor,  masters  and  slaves,  is  estab- 
lished f  by  the  Church-Christian  religion  as  definitely 
and  glaringly  as  by  other  religions.  Yet,  judging  by 
what  we  know  of  Christian  teaching  in  its  earliest  form 
in  the  Gospels,  it  would  seem  that  the  chief  methods  of 
perversion  made  use  of  in  other  religions  had  been  fore- 
seen, and  a  clear  warning  against  them  had  been  uttered. 
Against  a  priestly  caste,  it  was  plainly  said  that  no 
man  may  be  the  teacher  of  another  ('  Call  no  man  your 
father — neither  be  ye  called  masters ').  Against 
attributing  sanctity  to  books  it  was  said,  that  the  spirit 
is  important,  but  not  the  letter,  that  man  should  not 
believe  in  human  traditions,  and  that  all  the  law  and 
the  prophets  (that  is,  all  the  books  regarded  as  sacred 
writing)  amount  only  to  this,  that  we  should  do  to 
others  as  we  wish  them  to  do  to  us.  If  nothing  is  said 
against  miracles,  and  if  in  the  Gospels  themselves 
miracles  are  described  which  Jesus  is  supposed  to  have 
performed,  it  is,  nevertheless,  evident  from  the  whole 
spirit  of  the  teaching,  that  Jesus  based  the  proof  of  the 
validity  of  his  doctrine,  not  on  miracles,  but  on  the 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION?  SOI 

merits  of  the  teaching  itself.  ('  If  any  man  willeth 
to  do  his  will,  he  shall  know  of  the  teaching,  whether 
it  be  of  God,  or  whether  I  speak  from  myself/)  And, 
above  all,  Christianity  proclaims  the  equality  of  men, 
no  longer  merely  as  a  deduction  from  man's  relation  to 
the  infinite,  but  as  a  basic  doctrine  of  the  brotherhood 
of  all  men,  resulting  from  their  being  acknowledged 
as  sons  of  God. 

It  seems,  therefore,  as  though  it  should  have  been 
impossible  to  pervert  Christianity  so  as  to  destroy  the 
consciousness  of  equality  among  men.  But  the  human 
mind  is  subtle,  and  (perhaps  unconsciously  or  semi- 
consciously)  <a  quite  new  dodge  was  devised  to  make 
the  warnings  contained  in  the  Gospels,  and  this  plain 
pronouncement  of  equality  among  men,  inoperative, 
rhis  dodge  consisted  in  attributing  infallibility  not  only 
to  certain  writings,  but  also  to  a  certain  set  of  men 
called  The  Church,  who  have  a  right  to  hand  on  this 
infallibility  to  people  they  themselves  select. 

A  slight  addition  to  the  Gospels  was  invented,  telling 
how  Christ,  when  about  to  go  up  into  the  sky,  handed 
over  to  certain  men  the  exclusive  right — not  merely  to 
teach  others  divine  truth  (according  to  the  literal  text 
of  the  Gospel  he  bequeathed  at  the  same  time  the  right, 
not  generally  utilized,  of  being  invulnerable  by  snakes, 
or  poisons)* — but  also  to  decide  which  people  should  be 
saved  or  the  reverse,  and,  above  all,  to  confer  this 
power  on  others.  And  the  result  was  that  as  soon  as 
this  idea  of  a  Church  was  firmly  established,  all  the 
Gospel  warnings  hindering  the  perversion  of  Christ's 
teaching  became  inoperative,  for  the  Church  was 
superior  both  to  reason  and  to  the  writings  esteemed 
sacred.  Reason  was  acknowledged  to  be  the  source  of 
errors,  and  the  Gospels  were  explained  not  as  common- 
sense  demanded,  but  as  suited  those  who  constituted 
the  Church. 

*  *  Go  ye  into  all  the  world,  and  preach  the  Gospel.  .  .  . 
And  these  signs  shall  follow  them  that  believe  ;  in  my 
name  .  .  .  they  shall  take  up  serpents ;  and  if  they  drink 
any  deadly  thing,  it  shall  in  no  wise  hurt  them.'— Mark 
xvi.  15-18. 


302  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

And  so  all  the  three  former  methods  of  perverting 
religion— a  priesthood,  miracles,  and  the  infallibility  of 
scriptures — were  admitted  in  full  force  into  Christianity. 
Intermediaries  between  God  and  man  were  admitted 
because  the  need  and  fitness  of  having  such  inter- 
mediaries was  recognised  by  the  Church  ;  the  validity 
of  miracles  was  acknowledged  because  the  infallible 
Church  testified  to  them  ;  and  the  sanctity  of  the  Bible 
was  acknowledged  because  it  was  acknowledged  by  the 
Church. 

And  Christianity  was  perverted  as  all  other  religions 
had  been,  but  with  this  difference,  that  just  because 
Christianity  most  clearly  proclaimed  its,  fundamental 
principle — the  equality  of  all  men  as  sons  of  God — it 
was  necessary  most  forcibly  to  pervert  its  whole  teach- 
ing, in  order  to  hide  this  fundamental  principle.  And 
by  the  help  of  this  conception  of  a  Church,  this  has 
been  done  to  a  greater  extent  than  in  any  other  religion. 
So  that  really  no  religion  has  ever  preached  thing3  so 
evidently  incompatible  with  reason  and  with  contem- 
porary knowledge,  or  so  immoral,  as  the  doctrines 
preached  by  Church-Christianity.  Not  to  speak  of  all 
the  absurdities  of  the  Old  Testament,  such  as  the 
creation  of  light  before  the  sun,  the  creation  of  the 
world  six  thousand  years  ago,  the  housing  of  all  the 
animals  in  the  Ark  ;  or  of  the  many  immoral  horrors, 
such  as  injunctions  to  massacre  children  and  whole 
populations  at  God's  command ;  not  to  speak  even  of 
the  absurd  Sacrament  of  which  Voltaire  used  to  say, 
that  though  there  have  been  and  are  many  absurd 
religious  doctrines,  there  never  before  was  one  in  which 
the  chief  act  of  religion  consisted  in  eating  one's  own 
God, — not  to  dwell  on  all  that,  what  can  be  more 
absurd  than  that  the  Mother  of  God  was  both  a 
mother  and  a  virgin  ;  that  the  sky  opened  and  a  voice 
spoke  from  up  there  ;  that  Christ  new  into  the  sky  and 
sits  somewhere  up  there  at  the  right  hand  of  his  father  ; 
or  that  God  is  both  One  and  Three,  not  three  Gods  like 
Brahma,  Vishnu  and  Shiva,  but  One  and  yet  Three  ? 
And  what  can   be  more  immoral   than   the  terrible 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION  ?  303 

doctrine  that  an  angry  and  revengeful  God  punishes  all 
men  for  Adam's  sin,  and  sent  his  son  on  earth  to  save 
them,  knowing  beforehand  that  men  would  kill  him 
and  would  therefore  be  damned  ;  and  that  salvation 
from  sin  consists  in  being  baptized,  or  in  believing  that 
all  these  things  really  happened,  and  that  the  son  of 
God  was  killed  by  men  that  men  might  be  saved,  and 
that  God  will  punish  with  eternal  torments  those  who 
do  not  believe  this  ? 

So  that,  leaving  aside  things  some  people  consider  as 
additions  to  the  chief  dogmas  of  this  religion — things 
such  as  various  relics,  icons  of  various  Mothers  of  God,* 
prayers  asking  for  favours  and  addressed  to  saints  each 
of  whom  has  his  own  speciality — and  not  to  speak  also 
of  the  Protestant  doctrine  of  predestination — the  very 
foundations  of  this  religion,  admitted  by  all  and  formu- 
lated in  the  Nicene  Creed,  are  so  absurd  and  immoral, 
and  run  so  counter  to  right  feeling  and  to  common- 
sense,  that  men  cannot  believe  in  them.  Men  may 
repeat  any  form  of  words  with  their  lips,  but  they 
cannot  believe  things  that  have  no  meaning.  It  is 
possible  to  say  with  one's  lips  :  e  I  believe  the  world 
was  created  six  thousand  years  ago ';  or,  '  I  believe 
Christ  flew  up  into  the  sky  and  sat  down  next  to  his 
Father  9\  or,  '  God  is  One  and  at  the  same  time  Three  * 
— but  no  one  can  believe  these  things,  for  the  words 
have  no  sense.  And  therefore  men  of  our  modern 
world  who  profess  this  perverted  form  of  Christianity 
really  believe  in  nothing  at  all. 

And  that  is  the  peculiar  characteristic  of  our  time. 


People  in  our  time  do  not  believe  in  anything,  yet, 
using  a  false  definition  of  faith  which  they  take  from 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (wrongly  ascribed  to  Paul), 

*  The  wonder-working  icons  of  the  Kazan,  Iberian,  and 
many  other  '  Mothers  of  God,'  are  all  paintings  of  Mary  the 
mother  of  Jesus,  to  which  various  miraculous  powers  are 
attributed  in  Russia. 


304  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

they  imagine  they  have  faith.  Faith  according  to  that 
definition  is  '  the  substance  of  things  hoped  for,  the 
evidence  of  things  not  seen J  (Heb.  xi.  1).  But — not 
to  mention  the  fact  that  faith  cannot  be  a  '  substance,' 
since  it  is  a  mental  condition  and  not  an  objective 
reality — faith  is  also  not  'the  evidence  of  things  not 
seen,'  for  the  ' evidence'  referred  to  in  the  Epistle,  as 
the  context  shows,  is  simply  credulity,  and  credulity 
and  faith  are  two  different  things.* 

Faith  is  neither  hope  nor  credulity,  but  a  special 
state  of  the  soul.  Faith  is  man's  consciousness  that 
his  position  in  the  world  is  such  as  obliges  him  to  do 
certain  things.  Man  acts  in  accord  with  his  faith  not 
because,  as  is  said  in  our  Russian  Catechism,  he  believes 
in  the  unseen  as  in  the  seen,  nor  because  he  hopes  to 
attain  his  expectation,  but  only  because,  having  defined 
his  position  in  the  universe,  he  naturally  acts  according 
to  that  position.  An  agriculturist  cultivates  the  laud, 
and  a  navigator  sets  out  to  sea,  not  because,  as  the 
Catechism  says,  they  believe  in  the  unseen,  or  hope  to 
receive  a  reward  for  their  activity  (such  hope  exists,  but 
it  is  not  what  guides  them),  but  because  they  consider 
that  activity  to  be  their  calling.  So  also  a  religiously- 
believing  man  acts  in  a  certain  way,  not  because  he 
believes  in  the  unseen  or  expects  a  reward  for  his 
activity,  but  because,  having  understood  his  position  in 
the  universe,  he  naturally  acts  in  accord  with  that 
position.  If  a  man  has  decided  that  his  position  in 
society  is  that  of  a  labourer,  an  artisan,  an  official,  or  a 
merchant,  then  he  considers  it  necessary  to  work  ;  and 

*  What  is  fundamental  in  the  above  argument  is,  that 
the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  tlie  Hebrews  defines  faith  without 
indicating  that  it  relates  man  to  God  rationally,  and  supplies 
guidance  for  conduct;  while,  in  Tolstoy's  apprehension,  these 
are  just  the  essential  characteristics  of  faith,  as  of  religion. 
The  paragraph  has  been  altered  for  the  present  edition 
because,  as  Tolstoy  first  wrote  it,  it  was  aimed  chiefly  against 
the  Russian  and  Slavonic  versions  of  Hebrews  xi.  1,  and 
was  therefore  perplexing  to  English  readers.  It  has  now 
been  worded  to  fit  the  English  authorized  version,  and  can, 
with  equal  ease,  be  worded  to  fit  the  Greek  text. 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION?  305 

as  a  labourer,  an  artisan,  an  official,  or  a  merchant,  he 
does  his  work.  Just  so  do  men  in  general,  who,  one 
way  or  other,  have  denned  their  position  in  the  world, 
necessarily  and  naturally  act  in  accord  with  that  defini- 
tion (which  sometimes  is  rather  a  dim  consciousness 
than  a  definition).  Thus,  for  instance,  a  man  having 
defined  his  position  in  the  world  as  that  of  a  member  of 
a  nation  chosen  by  God,  which  in  order  to  enjoy  God's 
protection  must  fulfil  His  demands,  will  live  in  such  a 
way  as  to  fulfil  those  demands  ;  another  man,  having 
defined  his  position  on  the  supposition  that  he  has 
passed  and  is  passing  through  various  forms  of  existence, 
and  that  on  his  actions  more  or  less  depends  his  better 
or  worse  future,  will  be  guided  in  life  by  that  defini- 
tion ;  and  the  conduct  of  a  third  man,  who  has  defined 
his  position  as  that  of  a  chance  combination  of  atoms, 
in  which  a  consciousness  has  been  temporarily  kindled 
which  must  be  extinguished  for  ever,  will  differ  from 
that  of  the  two  first. 

The  conduct  of  these  men  will  be  quite  different, 
because  they  have  defined  their  positions  differently — 
that  is  to  say,  they  have  different  faiths.  Faith  is  the 
same  thing  as  religion,  only  with  this  difference  :  that 
by  the  word  religion  we  imply  something  observed  out- 
side us,  while  what  we  call  faith  is  the  same  thing,  only 
experienced  by  man  within  himself.  Faith  is  a  relation 
man  is  conscious  of  towards  the  infinite  universe,  and 
from  this  relation  the  direction  of  his  activity  results. 
And,  therefore,  true  faith  is  never  irrational  or  incom- 
patible with  present-day  knowledge,  and  it  cannot  be 
its  characteristic  to  be  supernatural  or  absurd,  as 
people  suppose,  and  as  was  expressed  by  a  Father  of 
the  Church  who  said  :  e  Credo  quia  absurdum '  (I  believe 
because  it  is  absurd).  On  the  contrary,  the  assertions 
of  true  faith,  though  they  cannot  be  proved,  never  con- 
tain anything  contrary  to  reason,  or  incompatible  with 
human  knowledge,  but  always  explain  that  in  life 
which,  without  the  conception  supplied  by  faith,  would 
appear  irrational  and  contradictory. 

Thus,,  for  instance,  an  ancient  Hebrew,  believing  in 


306  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

a  Supreme,  Eternal,  All-powerful  Being  who  created 
the  universe,  the  world,  the  animals,  man,  etc.,  and 
who  has  promised  to  patronize  His  people  if  they  will 
keep  His  law — did  not  believe  in  anything  irrational  or 
incompatible  with  his  knowledge,  but,  on  the  contrary, 
this  faith  explained  to  him  many  things  in  life  which 
without  such  a  faith  would  have  been  inexplicable  to  him. 

In  the  same  way,  a  Hindu  who  believes  that  our 
souls  have  lived  in  animals,  and  that,  according  to  the 
good  or  evil  life  led,  they  pass  into  higher  or  lower 
animals — by  the  help  of  this  faith  explains  to  himself 
many  things  that  without  it  would  be  inexplicable 
to  him. 

It  is  the  same  with  a  man  who  considers  life  an  evil, 
and  the  aim  of  life  to  be  peace  attainable  by  the 
annihilation  of  desire.  He  believes  in  nothing  un- 
reasonable, but,  on  the  contrary,  in  something  that 
makes  his  outlook  on  life  more  reasonable  than  it  was 
-  without  that  faith. 

li  is  the  same  with  a  true  Christian  who  believes 
that  God  is  the  spiritual  Father  of  all  men,  and  that 
the  highest  human  blessedness  is  attainable  by  man 
when  he  acknowledges  his  sonship  to  God  and  the 
brotherhood  of  all  mankind. 

All  these  faiths,  if  they  cannot  be  demonstrated,  are 
in  themselves  not  irrational,  but,  on  the  contrary,  give 
a  more  rational  meaning  to  occurrences  in  life  which 
without  them  seem  irrational  and  contradictory.  More- 
over, all  these  beliefs,  by  denning  man's  position  in  the 
universe,  inevitably  demand  conduct  in  accord  with 
that  position.  And  therefore,  if  a  religious  teaching 
asserts  irrational  propositions  which  explain  nothing, 
but  only  help  to  confuse  man's  understanding  of  life — 
then  it  is  not  a  faith,  but  only  a  perversion  of  faith, 
which  has  already  lost  the  chief  characteristic  of  true 
faith,  and  instead  of  demanding  anything  from  men  has 
become  their  pliant  tool.  One  of  the  chief  distinc- 
tions between  true  faitli  and  its  perversion,  is  that  in  a 
perverted  faith  man  demands  that  God,  in  return  for 
sacrifices  and  prayers,  should  fulfil  his  wishes  and  serve 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION  ?  307 

man.  But,  in  a  true  faith,  man  feels  that  God  demands 
from  him  the  fulfilment  of  His  will  :  demands  that  man 
should  serve  God. 

And  just  this  faith  is  lacking  among  the  men  of  our 
time — they  do  not  even  understand  what  it  is  like,  and 
by  faith  they  mean,  either  repeating  with  their  lips 
what  is  given  to  them  as  the  essence  of  faith,  or  the 
performance  of  ceremonies  which,  as  Church-Christ- 
ianity teaches,  help  them  to  attain  their  desires. 


People  in  our  world  live  without  any  faith.  One 
part,  the  educated,  wealthy  minority,  having  freed 
themselves  from  the  Church  hypnotism,  believe  in 
nothing  at  all,  and  look  upon  every  faith  as  an 
absurdity,  or  as  merely  a  useful  means  of  keeping  the 
masses  in  subjection.  The  immense,  poor,  uneducated  r 
majority — consisting  of  people  who,  with  few  excep- 
tions, are  really  sincere — being  still  under  the  hypno- 
tism of  the  Church,  think  they  believe  in  what  is 
suggested  to  them  as  a  faith,  although  it  is  not  really  a 
faith,  for  instead  of  elucidating  to  man  his  position  in 
the  world  it  only  darkens  it. 

This  situation,  and  the  relations  of  the  non-believing, 
insincere  minority  to  the  hypnotized  majority,  are  the 
conditions  which  shape  the  life  of  our  so-called  Chris- 
tian world.  And  this  life — both  of  the  minority  which 
holds  in  its  hands  the  means  of  hypnotization,  and  of 
the  hypnotized  majority — is  terrible,  both  on  account  of 
the  cruelty  and  immorality  of  the  ruling  classes,  and 
of  the  crushed  and  stupefied  condition  of  the  great 
working  masses.  Never  at  any  period  of  religious 
decline  has  the  neglect  and  forgetfulness  of  the  chief 
characteristic  of  all  religion,  and  of  Christianity  in 
particular — the  principle  of  human  equality — fallen  to 
so  low  a  level  as  it  has  descended  to  in  our  time. 

A  chief  cause,  in  our  time,  of  the  terrible  cruelty 
of  man  to  man — besides  the  complete  absence  of 
religion — is  the  refined  complexity  of  life,  which  hides 

u  2 


308  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

from  men  the  consequences  of  their  actions.  However 
cruel  the  Attilas  and  Genghis-Khans  and  their  followers 
may  have  been,  the  process  of  personally  killing  people 
face  to  face  must  have  been  unpleasant  to  them,  and  the 
consequences  of  the  slaughter  must  have  been  still  more 
unpleasant :  the  lamentations  of  the  kindred  of  the  slain, 
and  the  presence  of  the  corpses.  So  that  the  conse- 
quences of  their  cruelty  tended  to  diminish  it.  But  to-day 
we  kill  people  by  so  complex  a  transmission,  and  the  con- 
sequences of  our  cruelty  are  so  carefully  removed  and 
hidden  from  us,  that  there  are  no  effects  tending  to 
restrain  cruelty  ;  and  the  cruelty  of  one  set  of  men 
towards  another  is  ever  increasing  and  increasing,  till 
it  has  reached  dimensions  it  never  attained  before. 

I  think  that  nowadays  if — I  do  not  say  some  promi- 
nent villain  such  as  Nero,  but — some  most  ordinary 
man  of  business  wished  to  make  a  pond  of  human  blood 
for  diseased  rich  people  to  bathe  in  when  ordered  to  do 
so  by  their  learned  medical  advisers,  he  would  not  be 
prevented  from  arranging  it,  if  only  he  observed  the 
accepted  and  respectable  forms :  that  is,  did  not  use 
violence  to  make  people  shed  their  blood,  but  got  them 
into  such  a  position  that  they  could  not  live  without 
shedding  it;  and  if,  also,  he  engaged  priests  and 
scientists  :  the  former  to  consecrate  the  new  pond  as 
they  consecrate  cannons,  ironclads,  prisons  and  gallows  ; 
and  the  latter  to  find  proofs  of  the  necessity  and 
justifiability  of  such  an  institution,  as  they  have  found 
proofs  of  the  necessity  for  wars  and  brothels.  * 

The  fundamental  principle  of  all  religion  —  the 
equality  of  men — is  so  forgotten,  neglected,  and 
buried  under  all  sorts  of  absurd  dogmas,  in  the 
religion  now  professed ;  and  in  science  this  same 
inequality  (in  the  theory  of  the  struggle  for  existence 
and  survival  of  the  fittest)  is  so  acknowledged  to  be 
a  necessary  condition  of  life — that  the  destruction  of 
millions  of  human  lives  for  the  convenience  of  a  ruling 

*  Laws  similar  to  our  'Contagious  Diseases  Prevention 
Act'  of  1864  (supported  by  the  Royal  College  of  Physicians 
and  Surgeons  in  1866)  still  exist  in  Russia,  as  well  as  a 
regular  system  of  licensing  houses  of  ill-fame. 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION?  309 

minority  is  considered  a  most  usual  and  necessary 
event,  and  is  continually  going  on. 

Men  of  to-day  do  not  know  how  to  express  sufficient 
delight  over  the  splendid,  unprecedented,  colossal  pro- 
gress achieved  by  technical  science  during  the  nine- 
teenth century. 

There  is  no  doubt  that  never  in  history  was  such 
material  progress  made  in  mastering  the  powers  of 
Nature  as  during  the  nineteenth  century.  But,  also, 
there  is  no  doubt  that  never  in  history  was  there  such 
an  example  of  immoral  life,  freed  from  any  force 
restraining  man's  animal  inclinations,  as  that  given 
by  our  ever-increasingly  bestialized,  Christian  humanity. 
TTie  material  progress  achieved  in  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury has  really  been  great ;  but  that  progress  has  been 
bought,  and  is  being  bought,  by  such  neglect  of  the  most 
elementary  demands  of  morality,  as  humanity  never 
before  was  guilty  of,  even  in  the  days  of  Genghis-Khan, 
Attila,  or  Nero. 

There  is  no  doubt  that  the  ironclads,  railroads, 
printing-presses,  tunnels,  phonographs,  Rontgen-rays, 
and  so  forth,  are  very  good.  They  are  all  very  good, 
but  what  are  also  good — good,  as  Ruskin  says,  beyond 
comparison  with  anything  else — are  human  lives,  such 
as  those  of  which  millions  are  now  mercilessly  ruined 
for  the  acquisition  of  ironclads,  railways,  and  tunnels, 
which,  instead  of  beautifying  life,  disfigure  it.  To  this 
the  usual  reply  is,  that  appliances  are  already  being 
invented,  and  will  with  time  be  invented,  to  check  such 
destruction  of  human  life  as  is  now  going  on — but  this 
is  untrue.  As  long  as  men  do  not  consider  all  men 
their  brothers,  and  do  not  consider  human  lives  the 
most  sacred  of  all  things — on  no  account  to  be  sacrificed ; 
since  to  support  them  is  the  very  first  and  most  imme- 
diate of  duties — that  is,  as  long  as  men  do  not  treat 
each  other  religiously,  they  will  always,  for  the  sake 
of  personal  advantage,  ruin  one  another's  lives.  No 
one  will  be  so  silly  as  to  agree  to  spend  thousands  of 
pounds,  if  he  can  attain  the  same  end  by  spending  a 
hundred  pounds — with  a  few  human  lives  that  are  at 


310  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

his  disposal  thrown  in.  On  the  railroad  in  Chicago, 
ahout  the  same  number  of  people  are  crushed  each 
year.  And  the  owners  of  the  railroads,  quite  naturally, 
do  not  adopt  appliances  which  would  prevent  these 
people  from  being  crushed,  for  they  have  calculated 
that  the  annual  payments  to  the  injured  and  to  their 
families  come  to  less  than  the  interest  on  the  cost  of 
such  appliances. 

Very  possibly  these  men  who  ruin  human  lives  for 
their  own  profit  may  be  shamed  by  public  opinion,  or 
otherwise  compelled,  to  provide  the  appliances.  But  as 
long  as  men  are  not  religious,  and  do  their  deeds  to  be 
seen  of  men  and  not  as  in  the  sight  of  God,  they  will, 
after  providing  appliances  in  one  place  to  secure  people's 
lives,  in  other  matters  again  treat  human  lives  as  the 
best  material  out  of  which  to  make  a  profit. 

It  is  easy  to  conquer  Nature,  and  to  build  railways, 
steamers,  museums,  and  so  forth,  if  one  does  not  spare 
human  lives.  The  Egyptian  Pharaohs  were  proud  of 
their  pyramids,  and  we  are  delighted  with  them,  for- 
getting the  millions  of  slaves5  lives  that  were  sacrificed 
for  their  erection.  And  in  the  same  way  we  are  de- 
lighted with  our  exhibition -palaces,  ironclads,  and 
transoceanic  cables — forgetting  with  what  we  pay  for 
these  things.  We  should  not  feel  proud  of  all  this, 
till  it  is  all  done  by  free  men,  and  not  by  slaves. 

Christian  nations  have  conquered  and  subdued  the 
American  Indians,  Hindus,  and  Africans,  and  are 
now  conquering  and  subduing  the  Chinese,  and  are 
proud  of  doing  so.  But,  really,  these  conquests  and 
subjugations  do  not  result  from  the  Christian  nations 
being  spiritually  superior  to  those  conquered,  but, 
contrariwise,  from  their  being  spiritually  far  inferior  to 
them.  Leaving  the  Hindus  and  Chinese  out  of  account, 
even  among  the  Zulus  there  were,  and  still  are,  some 
sort  of  obligatory  religious  rules,  prescribing  certain 
actions  and  forbidding  others  ;  but  among  our  Christian 
nations  there  are  none  at  all.  Rome  conquered  the 
world  just  when  Rome  had  freed  itself  from  every 
religion.     The  same,  only  in  a  greater  degree,  is  the 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION  ?  311 

case  now  with  the  Christian  nations.  They  are  all  in 
one  and  the  same  condition  of  having  rejected  religion ; 
and,  therefore,  notwithstanding  dissensions  among 
themselves,  they  are  all  united  and  form  one  con- 
federate band  of  robbers,  among  whom  theft,  plunder, 
depravity  and  murder,  individually  or  collectively, 
goes  on  without  causing  the  least  compunction  of  con- 
science, and  even  with  the  greatest  self-complacency, 
as  occurred  the  other  day  in  China.  Some  believe  in 
nothing,  and  are  proud  of  it ;  others  pretend  to  believe 
in  what  they  for  their  own  advantage  hypnotize  the 
common  folk  into  accepting  as  a  faith  ;  while  others, 
again — the  great  majority,  the  common  people  as  a 
whole — accept  as  a  faith  the  hypnotic  suggestions  to 
which  they  are  subjected,  and  slavishly  submit  to  all 
that  is  demanded  of  them  by  the  dominant  and  un- 
believing hypnotizers. 

And  what  these  hypnotizers  demand  is,  what  Nero 
and  all  like  him,  who  have  tried  in  some  way  to  fill 
the  emptiness  of  their  lives,  have  always  demanded :  the 
satisfaction  of  their  insane  and  superabounding  luxury. 
Luxury  is  obtained  in  no  other  way  than  by  enslaving 
men,  and  as  soon  as  there  is  enslavement  luxury 
increases  ;  and  the  increase  of  luxury  inevitably  drags 
after  it  an  increase  of  slavery  ;  for  only  people  who  are 
cold  and  hungry,  and  bound  down  by  want,  will  con- 
tinue all  their  lives  long  doing  not  what  they  want,  but 
what  is  wanted  only  for  the  pleasure  of  their  masters. 


In  chapter  vi.  of  the  Book  of  Genesis  there  is  a 
profound  passage  in  which  the  author  says  that  God, 
before  the  Flood,  having  seen  that  the  spirit  He  had 
given  to  men  that  they  might  serve  Him  was  used  by 
them  only  to  serve  their  own  desires,  became  so  angry 
with  men  that  He  repented  of  having  created  them, 
and,  before  entirely  destroying  them,  decided  to  shorten 
the  life  of  man  to  120  years.  And  the  very  thing  that, 
according  to  the  Bible,  then  so  provoked  God's  anger 
that  it  caused  Him  to  shorten  man's  life,  is  again  going 
on  among  the  people  of  our  Christian  world. 


312  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

Reason  is  the  power  which  enables  men  to  define 
their  relation  to  the  universe,  and  as  all  men  stand  in 
one  and  the  same  relation  to  the  universe,  it  follows 
that  religion — which  is  the  elucidation  of  that  relation 
— unites  men.  And  union  among  men  affords  them  the 
highest  attainable  welfare,  both  physical  and  spiritual. 

Complete  union  with  the  highest  and  most  perfect 
reason,  and  therefore  complete  welfare,  is  the  ideal 
towards  which  humanity  strives  ;  and  all  religions  unite 
people,  by  supplying  identical  answers  to  all  men  of 
any  given  society  when  they  ask  what  the  universe  is, 
and  what  its  inhabitants  are  ;  and  by  uniting  them  it 
brings  them  nearer  to  the  attainment  of  welfare.  But 
when  reason,  diverging  from  its  natural  function  (that 
of  determining  man's  relation  to  God,  and  what  his 
activity  should  be,  conformably  to  that  relation),  is  used 
in  the  service  of  the  flesh,  and  for  angry  strife  with 
other  men  and  other  fellow-creatures,  and  when  it  is 
even  used  to  justify  this  evil  life,  so  contrary  to  man's 
nature  and  to  the  purpose  for  which  he  is  intended — 
then  those  terrible  calamities  result,  under  which 
the  majority  of  men  are  now  suffering,  and  a  state  is 
reached  that  makes  any  return  to  a  reasonable  and 
good  life  seem  almost  impossible. 

Pagans  united  by  the  crudest  religious  teaching  are 
far  nearer  the  recognition  of  truth  than  the  pseudo- 
Christian  nations  of  our  day,  who  live  without  any 
religion,  and  among  whom  the  most  advanced  people 
are  themselves  convinced — and  suggest  to  others — that 
religion  is  unnecessary,  and  that  it  is  much  better  to 
live  without  any'. 

Among  the  pagans  men  may  be  found  who,  recog- 
nising the  inconsistency  of  their  faith  with  their 
increasing  knowledge,  and  with  the  demands  of  their 
reason,  produce  or  adopt  a  new  religion  more  in  accord 
with  the  spiritual  condition  of  their  nation,  and  accept- 
able to  their  compatriots  and  co-believers.  But  men  of 
our  world — some  of  whom  regard  religion  as  an  instru- 
ment wherewith  to  keep  common  folk  in  subjection, 
while  others  consider  all  religion  absurd,  and  yet  others 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION?  313 

(the  great  majority  of  the  nation),  while  living  under 
the  hypnotism  of  a  gross  deception,  think  they  possess 
true  religion — hecome  impervious  to  any  forward  move- 
ment, and  incapable  of  any  approach  towards  truth- 
Proud  of  their  improvements  in  things  that  regard 
the  bodily  life,  as  well  as  of  their  refined,  idle  reason- 
ings (in  which  they  aim  not  only  at  justifying  them- 
selves, but  also  at  proving  their  superiority  to  any  other 
people  of  any  age  of  history),  they  petrify  in  ignorance 
and  immorality,  while  feeling  fully  assured  that  they 
stand  on  an  elevation  never  before  reached  by  hu- 
manity, and  that  every  step  forward  along  the  path  of 
ignorance  and  immorality  raises  them  to  yet  greater 
heights  of  enlightenment  and  progress. 


Man  naturally  wishes  to  bring  his  bodily  (physical) 
and  his  rational  (spiritual)  activity  into  conformity. 
He  cannot  be  at  peace  until,  in  one  way  or  other,  he 
has  reached  that  conformity.  But  it  is  attainable  in 
two  different  ways.  One  way  is  for  a  man  to  decide  by 
the  use  of  his  reason  on  the  necessity  or  desirability  of 
a  certain  action  or  actions,  and  then  to  behave  accord- 
ingly ;  the  other  way  is  for  a  man  to  commit  actions 
under  the  influence  of  his  feelings,  and  then  to  invent 
intellectual  explanations  or  justifications  for  what  he 
has  done. 

The  first  method  of  conforming  one's  actions  with 
one's  reason  is  characteristic  of  men  who  have  some 
religion,  and  on  the  basis  of  its  precepts  decide  what 
they  ought  and  what  they  ought  not  to  do.  The 
second  method  is  generally  characteristic  of  men  who 
are  not  religious,  and  have  no  general  standard  by 
which  to  judge  the  quality  of  actions,  and  who  there- 
fore always  set  up  a  conformity  between  their  reason 
and  their  actions,  not  by  subjecting  the  latter  to  their 
reason,  but  (after  acting  under  the  sway  of  feeling)  by 
using  reason  to  justify  what  they  have  done. 

A  religious  man — knowing  what  is  good  and  what  is 


314  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

bad  in  his  own  activity  and  in  that  of  others,  and 
knowing  also  why  one  thing  is  good  and  another  is 
bad — when  he  sees  a  contradiction  between  the  de- 
mands of  reason  and  his  own  or  other  men's  actions, 
will  employ  the  whole  force  of  his  reason  to  find  means 
to  destroy  these  contradictions  by  learning  how  best  to 
bring  his  actions  into  agreement  with  the  demands  of 
his  reason.  But  a  man  without  religion — who  has  no 
standard  whereby  to  judge  the  quality  of  actions  apart 
from  the  pleasure  they  afford  him — yielding  to  the 
sway  of  his  feelings  (which  are  most  various  and  often 
contradictory),  involuntarily  falls  into  contradictions  ; 
and,  having  fallen  into  contradictions,  tries  to  solve  or 
hide  them  by  arguments  more  or  less  elaborate  and 
clever,  but  always  untruthful.  And  therefore,  while 
the  reasoning  of  truly  religious  men  is  always  simple, 
direct,  and  truthful,  the  mental  activity  of  men  who 
lack  religion  becomes  particularly  subtle,  complex,  and 
insincere. 

I  will  take  the  most  common  example :  that  of  a 
man  who  is  addicted  to  vice — that  is,  is  not  chaste,  not 
faithful  to  his  wife,  or,  being  unmarried,  indulges  in 
vice.  If  he  is  a  religious  man,  he  knows  that  this  is 
wrong,  and  all  the  efforts  of  his  reason  are  directed  to 
finding  means  to  free  himself  from  his  vice :  avoiding 
intercourse  with  adulterers  and  adulteresses,  increasing 
the  amount  of  his  work,  arranging  a  strict  life  for  him- 
self, not  allowing  himself  to  look  on  a  woman  as  on  an 
object  of  desire,  and  so  forth.  And  all  this  is  very 
simple,  and  everyone  can  understand  it.  But  if  the 
incontinent  man  is  not  religious,  he  at  once  begins  to 
devise  all  sorts  of  explanations  to  prove  that  falling  in 
love  with  women  is  very  good.  And  then  we  get  all 
sorts  of  most  complex,  cunning,  and  subtle  considera- 
tions about  the  affinity  of  souls,  about  beauty,  about  the 
freedom  of  love,  etc.  ;  and  the  more  these  spread,  the 
more  they  darken  the  question  and  hide  the  essential 
truth. 

Among  those  who  lack  religion,  the  same  thing 
happens  in  all  spheres  of  activity  and  of  thought.     To 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION?  315 

hide  underlying  contradictions,  complex,  subtle  dis- 
quisitions are  piled  up,  which,  by  filling  the  mind  with 
all  sorts  of  unnecessary  rubbish,  divert  men's  attention 
from  what  is  important  and  essential,  and  make  it  pos- 
sible for  them  to  petrify  in  the  deceit  in  which,  without 
noticing  it,  the  people  of  our  world  are  living. 

c  Men  loved  the  darkness  rather  than  the  light ;  for 
their  works  were  evil,'  says  the  Gospel.  '  For  every 
one  that  doeth  ill  hateth  the  light,  and  cometh  not  to 
the  light,  lest  his  works  should  be  reproved/ 

And  therefore  the  men  of  our  world,  having,  in 
consequence  of  their  lack  of  religion,  arranged  a  most 
cruel,  animal,  and  immoral  life,  have  also  brought 
their  complex,  subtle,  unprofitable  activity  of  mind — 
hiding  the  evil  of  this  kind  of  life — to  such  a  degree  of 
unnecessary  intricacy  and  confusion,  that  the  majority 
of  them  have  quite  lost  the  capacity  to  distinguish 
good  from  evil,  or  what  is  false  from  what  is  true. 

There  is  not  a  single  question  the  men  of  our  world 
can  approach  directly  and  simply :  all  questions — 
economic,  national,  political  (whether  home  or  foreign), 
diplomatic  or  scientific,  not  to  mention  questions  of 
philosophy  and  religion — are  presented  so  artificially 
and  incorrectly,  and  are  swathed  in  such  thick  shrouds 
of  complex,  unnecessary  disputations — such  subtle  per- 
versions of  meanings  and  words,  such  sophistries  and 
disputes — that  all  arguments  about  such  questions 
revolve  on  one  spot,  connected  with  nothing,  and, 
like  driving-wheels  without  a  connecting  strap,  effect 
nothing  except  the  one  object  for  which  they  were  pro- 
duced :  to  hide  from  one's  self  and  from  others  the  evil 
in  which  men  live  and  the  evil  they  commit. 


In  every  domain  of  what  is  now  called  science,  one 
and  the  same  feature  is  encountered,  baffling  the  mental 
efforts  men  direct  to  the  investigation  of  various  domains 
of  knowledge.  This  feature  is,  that  all  these  scientific 
investigations  evade  the  essential  question  calling  for 


316  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

an  answer,  and  examine  side-issues  the  investigation  of 
which  brings  one  to  no  definite  result,  but  becomes 
more  intricate  the  further  one  advances.  Nor  can  this 
be  otherwise  in  a  science  which  selects  the  objects  of 
its  investigation  haphazard,  and  not  according  to  the 
demands  of  a  religious  conception  of  life,  denning  what 
should  be  studied  and  why  ;  what  first  and  what  after- 
wards. For  instance,  in  the  now  fashionable  subjects 
of  Sociology  and  Political  Economy,  it  would  seem 
that  there  is  really  only  one  question  :  c  How  is  it,  and 
why  is  it,  that  some  people  do  nothing,  while  others  are 
working  for  them  V  (If  there  is  another  question  : 
'Why  do  people  work  separately,  hindering  one 
another,  and  not  together  in  common,  as  would  be 
more  profitable?5  that  question  is  included  in  the 
first.  For  were  there  no  inequality,  there  would  be  no 
strife.)  It  would  seem  that  there  ought  to  be  only  that 
one  question,  but  science  does  not  even  think  of  pro- 
pounding and  replying  to  it,  but  commences  its  discus- 
sions from  afar  off,  and  conducts  them  so  that  its 
conclusions  can  never  either  solve  or  assist  the  solution 
of  the  fundamental  problem.  Discussions  are  started 
concerning  what  used  to  be  and  what  now  is  ;  and  the 
past  and  the  present  are  regarded  as  something  as 
unalterable  as  the  course  of  the  stars  in  the  heavens  ; 
and  abstract  conceptions  are  devised — value,  capital, 
profit,  and  interest — and  a  complex  play  of  wits  results 
(which  has  now  already  continued  for  a  hundred  years) 
among  the  disputants.  In  reality  the  question  can  be 
settled  very  easily  and  simply. 

Its  solution  lies  in  the  fact  that,  as  all  men  are 
brothers  and  equals,  each  should  act  towards  others  as 
he  wishes  them  to  act  towards  him ;  and,  therefore,  the 
whole  matter  depends  on  the  destruction  of  a  false 
religious  law,  and  the  restoration  of  the  true  religious 
law.  The  advanced  people  of  Christendom,  however, 
not  only  refuse  to  accept  that  solution,  but,  on  the  con- 
trary, try  to  hide  from  men  the  possibility  of  such  a 
solution,  and  therefore  devote  themselves  to  the  idle 
play  of  intelligence  which  they  call  science. 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION  ?  317 

The  same  thing  takes  place  in  the  domain  of  Juris- 
prudence. There  would  seem  to  be  only  one  essential 
question :  '  How  is  it  that  there  are  men  who  allow 
themselves  to  perpetrate  violence  on  others,,  to  fleece 
them,  confine  them,  execute  them,  send  them  to  the 
wars,  and  so  on  ?'  The  solution  of  that  question  is 
very  simple,  if  it  be  examined  from  the  only  point  of 
view  suitable  to  the  subject — the  religious.  From  a 
religious  point  of  view,  man  must  not  and  should  not 
subject  his  neighbour  to  violence,  and  therefore  only 
one  thing  is  needful  for  the  solution  of  the  question — 
namely,  to  destroy  all  superstitions  and  sophistries 
which  allow  of  violence,  and  to  instil  into  men  religious 
principles  clearly  excluding  the  possibility  of  violence. 

But  the  advanced  men,  instead  of  doing  this,  devote 
all  their  wits  to  the  task  of  hiding  from  others  the 
possibility  and  necessity  of  such  a  solution.  They  write 
mountains  of  books  about  all  sorts  of  laws :  civil, 
criminal,  police,  Church,  commercial,  etc.,  and  ex- 
pound and  dispute  about  these — fully  assured  that  they 
are  doing  something  not  only  useful  but  very  impor- 
tant. To  the  question,  'Why,  among  men  who  are 
naturally  equal,  may  some  judge,  coerce,  fleece,  and 
•  execute  others  r — they  give  no  reply,  and  do  not  even 
acknowledge  the  existence  of  such  a  question.  Accord- 
ing to  their  doctrine,  this  violence  is  not  committed  by 
men,  but  by  some  abstraction  called  The  State.  And 
similarly,  in  all  realms  of  knowledge,  the  learned  men 
of  to-day  evade  and  are  silent  about  the  essential  ques- 
tions, and  hide  the  underlying  contradictions. 

In  the  realm  of  history,  the  only  essential  question 
is  :  '  How  the  workers  (who  form  ^ft%ths  of  the  whole 
of  humanity)  lived  }3  To  this  question  we  get  nothing 
like  an  answer ;  the  question  is  ignored,  while  whole 
mountains  of  books  are  written  by  historians  of  one 
school  to  tell  of  the  stomach-aches  of  Louis  XL,  the 
horrors  committed  by  Elizabeth  of  England  or  Ivan  the 
Terrible  of  Russia,  of  who  were  their  Ministers,  and  of 
what  verses  and  comedies  were  written  by  literary  men 
to  amuse  these  Kings  and  their  mistresses  and  Ministers. 


318  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

Meanwhile,  the  historians  of  another  school  tell  us 
in  what  sort  of  country  a  people  lived,  what  they  ate, 
what  they  sold,  what  clothes  they  wore — and  in  general 
about  things  that  could  have  no  influence  on  the 
people's  true  life,  but  were  results  of  their  religion, 
which  the  historians  of  this  class  imagine  to  be  itself 
a  result  of  the  food  the  people  ate  and  the  clothes  they 
wore. 

Yet  an  answer  to  the  question :  c  How  did  the 
workers  live?'  cannot  be  given  till  we  acknowledge 
religion  to  be  the  essential  condition  of  a  people's  life. 
And  the  reply  is,  therefore,  to  be  found  in  the  study 
of  the  religions  believed  in  by  the  nations  :  for  these 
brought  them  to  the  position  in  which  they  lived. 

In  the  study  of  Natural  History  one  would  think  there 
was  little  need  to  darken  men's  common-sense ;  but 
even  here,  following  the  bent  of  mind  which  contem- 
porary science  has  adopted,  instead  of  giving  the  most 
natural  replies  to  the  questions :  '  What  is  the  world 
of  living  things  (plants  and  animals),  and  how  is  it 
subdivided?'  an  idle,  confused,  and  perfectly  useless 
chatter  is  started  (directed  chiefly  against  the  Biblical 
account  of  the  creation  of  the  world)  as  to  how 
organisms  came  into  existence — which,  really,  one 
neither  needs  to  know  nor  can  know,  for  this  origin, 
however  we  may  explain  it,  always  remains  hidden 
from  us  in  endless  time  and  space.  But  on  this  theme, 
theories  and  refutations  and  supplementary  theories 
are  invented,  filling  millions  of  books,  the  unexpected 
result  arrived  at  being  :  That  the  law  of  life  which  man 
should  obey  is — the  struggle  for  existence. 

More  than  that,  the  applied  sciences — such  as 
Technology  and  Medicine — in  consequence  of  the 
absence  of  any  guidance  from  religious  principle, 
inevitably  diverge  from  their  reasonable  purpose  and 
take  a  false  direction.  Thus,  Technology  is  directed 
not  to  lightening  the  toil  of  the  people,  but  to 
achieving  improvements  needed  only  by  the  rich,  and 
which  therefore  will  yet  more  widely  separate  the  rich 
from  the  poor,  the  masters  from  their  slaves.     If  some 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION  ?  319 

advantage  from  these  inventions  and  improvements — 
some  crumbs — do  reach  the  working-  classes,,  this  is  not 
at  all  because  they  were  intended  for  the  people,  but 
only  because  by  their  nature  they  could  not  be  kept 
from  the  people. 

It  is  the  same  with  medical  science,  which  has  ad- 
vanced in  its  false  direction  till  it  has  reached  a  stage 
at  which  only  the  rich  can  command  it ;  while  from 
their  manner  of  life  and  their  poverty  (and  as  a 
result  of  the  fact  that  the  questions  relating  to  the 
amelioration  of  the  life  of  the  poor  have  been  neglected) 
the  mass  of  the  people  can  only  avail  themselves  of  it 
under  conditions  that  most  clearly  show  how  medical 
science  has  diverged  from  its  true  purpose. 

But  this  avoidance  and  perversion  of  essential  ques- 
tions is  most  strikingly  seen  in  what  is  now  called 
Philosophy.  There  would  seem  to  be  one  essential 
question  for  philosophy  to  answer  :  '  What  must  I  do  ?' 
And  in  the  philosophy  of  the  Christian  nations  answers 
to  this  question — though  combined  with  very  much 
that  is  unnecessary  and  confused,  as  in  the  case  of 
Spinoza,  Kant  (in  his  Critique  of  Practical  Reason), 
Schopenhauer,  and  particularly  Rousseau — have  at  any 
rate  been  given.  But  latterly,  since  Hegel  (who 
taught  that  whatever  exists  is  reasonable)  the  question  : 
*  What  must  we  do  P  has  been  pushed  into  the  back- 
ground, and  philosophy  directs  its  whole  attention  to 
the  investigation  of  things  as  they  are,  and  to  making 
them  fit  into  a  prearranged  theory.  That  was  the  first 
downward  step.  The  next  step,  leading  human  thought 
to  a  yet  lower  level,  was  the  acknowledgment  of  the 
law  of  the  struggle  for  existence  as  fundamental, 
merely  because  that  struggle  can  be  observed  among 
plants  and  animals.  Under  the  influence  of  that 
theory,  it  is  assumed  that  the  destruction  of  the 
weakest  is  a  law  which  should  not  be  checked.  Finally 
came  the  third  step,  when  the  semi-sane  Nietzsche's 
puerile  efforts  at  originality,  which  do  not  even  present 
anything  complete  or  coherent,  but  are  as  it  were 
immoral,  offhand  jottings  of  utterly  baseless  thoughts, 


320  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

were  accepted  by  advanced  people  as  the  last  word  of 
philosophic  science.  In  reply  to  the  question  :  '  What 
must  we  do  }3  the  advice  is  now  plainly  offered  :  e  Live 
as  you  please,  paying  no  attention  to  the  lives  of 
others. ' 

If  anyone  doubted  the  terrible  state  of  stupefaction 
and  bestiality  to  which  our  Christian  humanity  has 
descended — without  speaking  of  the  crimes  recently 
committed  in  South  Africa  and  China,  and  which  were 
defended  by  priests  and  accepted  as  achievements  by 
all  the  great  ones  of  the  earth — the  extraordinary 
success  of  the  writings  of  Nietzsche  would  alone  suffice 
to  supply  an  unanswerable  proof.  Some  disjointed 
writings — aiming  most  obtrusively  at  effect — appear, 
written  by  a  man  suffering  from  megalomania,  a  bold 
but  limited  and  abnormal  German.  Neither  in  talent 
nor  by  their  validity  have  these  writings  any  claim  on 
public  attention.  In  the  days  of  Kant,  Leibnitz,  or 
Hume,  or  even  fifty  years  ago,  such  writings,  far  from 
attracting  attention,  could  not  even  have  appeared. 
But  in  our  days  all  the  so-called  educated  classes  of 
humanity  are  delighted  with  the  ravings  of  Mr. 
Nietzsche  ;  they  dispute  about  him  and  explain  him, 
and  innumerable  copies  of  his  works  are  printed  in  all 
languages. 

Tourgenef  humorously  says  that  there  are  such 
things  as  e  reversed  platitudes,'  and  that  they  are  often 
used  by  people  lacking  in  talent,  but  desirous  of 
attracting  attention.  Everyone  knows,  for  instance, 
that  water  is  wet :  but  suddenly  someone  seriously 
asserts  that  water  is  dry — not  ice,  but  water  is  dry  ; 
and  such  an  opinion,  if  confidently  expressed,  attracts 
attention. 

In  the  same  way,  the  whole  world  knows  that  virtue 
consists  in  subduing  one's  passions,  and  in  self-renun- 
ciation. This  is  known  not  by  Christians  only  (with 
whom  Nietzsche  imagines  he  is  fighting),  but  it  is  an 
eternal  and  supreme  law  which  all  humanity  has  re- 
cognised— in  Brahmanism,  Buddhism,  Confucianism, 
and  in  the  ancient  Persian  religion.     And  suddenly  a 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION?  321 

man  appears  who  announces  his  discovery  that  self- 
renunciation,  mildness,  meekness,  love— that  all  these 
are  vices,  which  are  ruining  humanity  (he  refers  to 
Christianity,  forgetting  all  the  other  religions).  It  is 
comprehensible  that  such  an  assertion  should,  at  first, 
perplex  people.  But,  after  thinking  a  little  and  failing 
to  find  in  his  writings  any  proofs  supporting  this  vague 
assertion,  every  rational  man  ought  to  reject  such 
books,  and  only  be  surprised  that  nowadays  there  is  no 
nonsense  too  arrant  to  find  a  publisher.  With  the 
works  of  Nietzsche  that  course  has  not  been  adopted. 
The  majority  of  pseudo-enlightened  people  seriously 
discuss  the  theory  of  f  Superhumanity,'  and  acclaim  its 
author  as  a  great  philosopher  :  a  successor  to  Descartes, 
Leibnitz  and  Kant. 

And  all  this  has  happened  because  the  majority  of 
pseudo-enlightened  men  of  to-day  dislike  anything  re- 
minding them  of  virtue,  or  of  its  chief  basis  :  self- 
renunciation  and  love — things  that  restrain  and  con- 
demn the  animal  life  they  lead  ;  and  they  gladly  wel- 
come a  doctrine  of  egotism  and  cruelty — however 
poorly,  unintelligibly  and  disjointedly  expressed — 
which  justifies  the  system  of  founding  one's  own  happi- 
ness and  greatness  upon  the  lives  of  others  :  the  system 
in  which  they  live. 


Christ  reproached  the  scribes  and  Pharisees,  because 
they  took  the  keys  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven,  but 
neither  themselves  entered  in  nor  let  others  enter. 

The  learned  scribes  of  to-day  do  the  same  :  they  have 
now  taken  the  keys,  not  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven 
but  of  enlightenment,  and  neither  enter  in  nor  let 
others  enter. 

The  hierophants,  the  priests,  by  all  sorts  of  decep- 
tion and  hypnotism,  have  instilled  into  people  an  idea 
that  Christianity  is  not  a  teaching  proclaiming  the 
equality  of  all  men,  and  therefore  destructive  of  the 
whole  present  system  of  life  ;  but  that,  on  the  contrary, 

x 


322  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

it  supports  the  existing  order  of  things  and  bids  us 
differentiate  people,  like  the  stars,  and  regard  them  as 
belonging  to  different  orders — acknowledging  any 
existing  authority  as  ordained  of  God,  and  obeying  it 
absolutely ;  in  fact,  suggesting  to  the  oppressed  that 
their  position  is  what  God  wishes  it  to  be,  and  that  they 
ought  to  put  up  with  it  meekly  and  humbly,  submitting 
to  their  oppressors,  who  need  not  be  meek  or  humble, 
but  should — as  Emperors,  Kings,  Popes,  Bishops,  and 
secular  or  spiritual  magnates  of  various  kinds — correct 
others  by  teaching  and  punishing  them,  while  them- 
selves living  in  splendour  and  luxury  which  it  is  the 
duty  of  those  in  subjection  to  supply.  And  the  ruling 
classes,  thanks  to  this  false  teaching  which  they  strongly 
support,  rule  over  the  people,  obliging  them  to  furnish 
means  of  support  for  their  rulers'  idleness,  luxury  and 
vices.  And  the  only  men  who  have  freed  themselves 
from  this  hypnotism — the  scientific  people  :  those,  there- 
fore, who  alone  are  able  to  free  the  people  from  their 
oppression — do  not  do  it,  though  they  say  they  wish  to  ; 
but,  instead  of  doing  what  might  attain  that  end,  they 
do  just  the  opposite,  imagining  that  they  thereby  serve 
the  people. 

One  would  think  these  men — even  from  casually  ob- 
serving what  it  is  that  those  who  hold  the  masses  in 
subjection  are  most  afraid  of — might  see  what  really 
moves  men,  and  what  really  keeps  them  down  in  the 
places  they  now  occupy ;  and  would  direct  their  whole 
force  to  that  source  of  power.  They  not  only  do  not 
do  this,  however,  but  they  consider  such  action  quite 
useless. 

It  is  as  if  these  men  did  not  wish  to  see  the  facts. 
They  assiduously,  and  sincerely,  do  all  sorts  of  different 
things  for  the  people,  but  they  do  not  do  the  one  thing 
primarily  needful ;  and  their  activity  is  like  the  activity 
of  a  man  trying  to  move  a  train  by  exerting  his  muscles, 
when  he  need  only  get  upon  the  engine  and  do  what  he 
constantly  sees  the  engine-driver  do :  move  a  lever  to 
let  steam  into  the  cylinders.  That  steam  is  men's  re- 
ligious conception  of  life.     And  they  need  only  notice 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION?  323 

the  eagerness  with  which  those  in  authority  retain  con- 
trol of  that  motive  power — by  means  of  which  the 
rulers  lord  it  over  the  masses — and  the  advanced  men 
will  understand  to  what  they  must  direct  their  efforts 
in  order  to  free  the  people  from  its  slavery. 

What  does  the  Sultan  of  Turkey  guard,  and  to  what 
does  he  cling  for  support  ?  And  why  does  the  Russian 
Emperor,  on  arriving  at  a  town,  go  first  thing  to  kiss 
an  icon  or  the  relics  of  some  saint  ?  And  why,  in  spite 
of  all  the  varnish  of  culture  he  so  prides  himself  on, 
does  the  German  Emperor  in  all  his  speeches — season- 
ably or  unseasonably — speak  of  God,  of  Christ,  of  the 
sanctity  of  religion,  of  oaths,  etc.  ?  Simply  because 
they  all  know  that  their  power  rests  on  the  army,  and 
that  the  army — the  very  possibility  of  such  a  thing  as 
an  .army  existing — rests  on  religion.  And  if  wealthy 
people  are  generally  particularly  devout :  making  a 
show  of  believing,  going  to  Church,  and  observing  the 
Sabbath — it  is  all  done  chiefly  because  an  instinct  of 
self-preservation  warns  them  that  their  exceptionally 
advantageous  position  in  the  community  is  bound  up 
with  the  religion  they  profess. 

These  people  often  do  not  know  in  what  way  their 
privileges  rest  on  religious  deception,  but  their  instinct 
of  self-preservation  warns  them  of  the  weak  spot  in 
that  on  which  their  power  rests,  and  they  first  of  all 
defend  that  place.  Within  certain  limits  these  people 
always  allow,  and  have  allowed,  socialistic  and  even  re- 
volutionary propaganda ;  but  the  foundations  of  religion 
they  never  allow  to  be  touched. 

And  therefore,  if  history  and  psychology  do  not 
suffice  to  enable  the  advanced  men  of  to-day — the 
learned,  the  Liberals,  the  Socialists,  the  Revolutionists 
and  Anarchists — to  discover  what  it  is  that  moves  the 
people,  this  visible  indication  should  suffice  to  convince 
them  that  the  motive  power  lies,  not  in  material  con- 
ditions, but  only  in  religion. 

Yet,  strange  to  say,  the  learned,  advanced  people  of 
to-day,  who  understand  and  discuss  the  conditions  of 
life  of  various  nations  very  acutely,  do  not  see  what  is 

x  2 


324  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

so  obvious  that  it  strikes  one's  eye.  If  these  men  inten- 
tionally leave  the  people  in  their  religious  ignorance  for 
the  sake  of  retaining  their  own  profitable  position 
among  the  minority, — this  is  a  terrible,  a  revolting 
fraud.  Men  who  act  so  are  the  very  hypocrites  Christ 
especially  denounced — the  only  people  He  did  in  fact 
denounce — and  He  denounced  them  because  no  monsters 
or  malefactors  ever  brought  so  much  evil  into  human 
life  as  is  brought  by  these  men. 

But  if  they  are  sincere,  the  only  explanation  of  so 
strange  an  eclipse  of  reason  is,  that  just  as  the  masses 
are  hypnotized  by  a  false  religion,  so  also  are  the  pseudo- 
enlightened  men  of  to-day  hypnotized  by  a  false  science 
which  has  decided  that  the  chief  motor-nerve,  that  now 
as  heretofore  actuates  humanity,  has  become  altogether 
useless,  and  can  be  replaced  by  something  else. 


Thig  delusion  or  deceit  of  the  scribes — the  educated 
men  of  our  world — is  the  peculiarity  of  our  times,  and 
in  this  lies  the  cause  of  the  miserable  condition  in  which 
Christian  humanity  now  lives,  as  well  as  of  the  brutaliza- 
tion  into  which  it  is  sinking  deeper  and  deeper. 

Jt  is  usual  for  the  advanced,  educated  classes  of  our 
world  to  assert  that  the  false  religious  beliefs  held  by 
the  masses  are  of  no  special  importance,  and  that  it  is 
not  worth  while,  and  is  unnecessary,  to  struggle  against 
them  directly,  as  was  done  by  Hume,  Voltaire,  Rousseau 
and  others.  Science,  they  think — that  is  to  say,  the 
disconnected,  casual  information  they  disseminate 
among  the  people — will  of  itself  attain  that  end,  and 
man,  having  learned  how  many  million  miles  it  is 
from  the  earth  to  the  sun,  and  what  metals  exist  in  the 
sun  and  the  stars,  will  cease  to  believe  in  Church 
doctrines. 

This  sincere,  or  insincere,  assertion  or  assumption 
covers  either  a  great  delusion  or  a  terrible  deception. 
From  the  very  earliest  years  of  childhood — the  years 
most  susceptible  to  suggestion,  when  those  who  train 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION?  325 

children  cannot  be  sufficiently  careful  what  they  trans- 
mit to  them — a  child  is  hypnotized  with  the  absurd, 
immoral  dogmas  of  so-called  Christian  religion,  irrecon- 
cilable with  our  reason  and  knowledge.  He  is  taught 
the  dogma  of  the  Trinity,  which  healthy  reason  cannot 
hold  ;  the  coming  of  one  of  the  three  Gods  to  earth 
for  the  salvation  of  the  human  race,  and  his  resurrection 
and  ascent  into  heaven ;  is  taught  to  expect  a  second 
coming,  and  punishment  in  eternal  torments  for  dis- 
belief in  these  dogmas ;  also  he  is  taught  to  pray  for 
what  he  wants  ;  and  many  other  things.  And  when  all 
this  (incompatible  as  it  is  with  reason,  contemporary 
knowledge,  and  man's  conscience)  is  indelibly  stamped 
on  the  child's  impressionable  mind,  he  is  left  to  himself 
to  find  his  way  as  he  can  amid  the  contradictions  which 
flow  from  these  dogmas  he  has  accepted  and  assimilated 
as  unquestionable  truths.  No  one  tells  him  how  he 
may  or  should  reconcile  these  contradictions  ;  or  if  the 
theologians  do  try  to  reconcile  them,  their  attempts 
only  confuse  the  matter  more  than  before.  So,  little 
by  little,  the  man  becomes  accustomed  to  suppose  (and 
the  theologians  strongly  support  this  notion)  that  reason 
cannot  be  trusted,  and  therefore  anything  is  possible, 
and  that  there  is  no  capacity  in  man  by  means  of  which 
he  can  himself  distinguish  good  from  evil,  or  falsehood 
from  truth  ;  and  that  in  what  is  most  important  for  him 
— his  actions — he  should  be  guided  not  by  his  reason, 
but  by  what  others  tell  him.  It  is  evident  what  a 
terrible  perversion  of  man's  spiritual  world  such  an 
education  must  produce,  reinforced  as  it  is  in  adult  life 
by  all  the  means  of  hypnotization  which,  by  the  aid  of 
the  priests,  is  continually  exercised  upon  the  people. 

If  a  man  of  strong  spirit,  with  great  labour  and 
suffering,  does  succeed  in  freeing  himself  from  the 
hypnotism  in  which  he  has  been  educated  in  childhood 
and  held  in  mature  life,  the  perversion  of  his  mind, 
produced  by  the  persuasion  that  he  must  distrust  his  own 
reason,  can  still  not  pass  without  leaving  traces — just 
as  in  the  physical  world  the  poisoning  of  an  organism 
with  some  powerful  virus  cannot  pass  without  leaving 


326  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

its  trace.  It  is  natural  for  such  a  man,  having  freed 
himself  from  the  hypnotism  of  this  deceit,  and  hating 
the  falsehood  from  which  he  has  just  escaped,  to  adopt 
the  view  advocated  by  advanced  men,  and  to  regard 
every  religion  as  an  obstacle  in  the  path  along  which 
humanity  is  progressing.  And  having  adopted  that 
opinion,  such  a* man  becomes,  like  his  teachers,  devoid 
of  principle — that  is,  devoid  of  conscience,  and  guided  in 
life  merely  by  his  desires.  Nor  does  he  condemn  him- 
self for  this,  but  he  considers  that  it  places  him  on  the 
highest  plane  of  mental  development  attainable  by  man. 

That  is  what  may  happen  with  men  of  strong  minds. 
The  less  strong,  though  they  may  be  roused  to  doubts, 
will  never  completely  free  themselves  from  the  decep- 
tion in  which  they  were  brought  up  ;  but  adopting  or 
inventing  various  cunningly-devised,  cloudy  theories  to 
justify  the  absurd  dogmas  they  have  accepted,  and 
living  in  a  sphere  of  doubts,  mist,  sophistries  and  self- 
deception,  they  will  co-operate  in  the  mystification  of 
the  masses  and  oppose  their  enlightenment. 

But  the  majority  of  men,  having  neither  the  strength 
nor  the  opportunity  to  struggle  against  the  hypnotism 
exercised  over  them,  will  live  and  die  generation  after 
generation,  as  they  now  do — deprived  of  man's  highest 
welfare,  which  is  a  truly  religious  understanding  of  life 
— and  will  remain  docile  tools  of  the  classes  that  rule 
over  them  and  deceive  them. 

And  it  is  this  terrible  deception  that  advanced  and 
learned  men  consider  unimportant,  and  not  worth 
directly  attacking.  The  only  explanation  of  such  an 
assertion,  if  those  who  make  it  are  sincere,  is,  that  they 
are  themselves  under  the  hypnotism  of  a  false  science  ; 
but  if  they  are  not  sincere,  then  their  conduct  is  ex- 
plained by  the  fact  that  an  attack  on  established  beliefs 
is  unprofitable  and  often  dangerous.  In  any  case,  one 
way  or  another,  the  assertion  that  the  profession  of  a 
false  religion  does  no  harm — or  though  harmful  is  un- 
important— and  that  one  can  therefore  disseminate 
enlightenment  without  destroying  religious  deception, 
is  quite  untrue. 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION?  327 

Mankind  can  be  saved  from  its  ills  only  by  being 
freed  both  from  the  hypnotism  in  which  the  priests 
are  holding  it,  and  from  that  into  which  the  learned 
are  leading  it.  To  pour  anything  into  a  full  bottle  one 
must  first  empty  out  what  it  contains.  And  similarly 
it  is  necessary  to  free  men  from  the  deception  of  their 
false  faith,  in  order  that  they  may  be  able  to  adopt  a 
true  religion  :  that  is,  a  correct  relation  (in  accord  with 
the  development  humanity  has  attained)  towards  the 
Source  of  all — towards  God  ;  and  that  from  this  rela- 
tion, they  may  obtain  guidance  for  their  actions. 


'But  is  there  any  true  religion?  Religions  are 
endlessly  various,  and  we  have  no  right  to  call  one  of 
them  true,  just  because  it  most  nearly  suits  our  own 
taste/ — is  what  people  say  who  look  at  the  external 
forms  of  religion  as  at  some  disease  from  which  they 
feel  themselves  free,  but  from  which  other  people  still 
suffer.  But  this  is  a  mistake  ;  religions  differ  in  their 
external  forms,  but  they  are  all  alike  in  their  funda- 
mental principles.  And  it  is  these  principles,  that  are 
fundamental  to  all  religions,  that  form  the  true  religion 
which  alone  at  the  present  time  is  suitable  for  us  all, 
and  the  adoption  of  which  alone  can  save  men  from 
their  ills. 

Mankind  has  lived  long,  and  just  as  it  has  produced 
and  improved  its  practical  inventions  through  suc- 
cessive generations,  so  also  it  could  not  fail  to  produce 
and  improve  those  spiritual  principles  which  have 
formed  the  bases  of  its  life,  as  well  as  the  rules  of 
conduct  that  resulted  from  those  principles.  If  blind 
men  do  not  see  these,  that  does  not  prove  that  they  do 
not  exist. 

This  religion  of  our  times,  common  to  all  men,  exists 
— not  as  some  sect  with  all  its  peculiarities  and  perver- 
sions, but  as  a  religion  consisting  of  those  principles 
which  are  alike  in  all  the  widespread  religions  known  to 
us,  and  professed  by  more   than   nine-tenths   of  the 


328  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

human  race ;  and  that  men  are  not  yet  completely 
brutalized  is  due  to  the  fact  that  the  best  men  of  all 
nations  hold  to  this  religion  and  profess  it,  even  if 
unconsciously,  and  only  the  hypnotic  deception  prac- 
tised [on  men  by  the  aid  of  the  priests  and  scientists 
now  hinders  men  from  consciously  adopting  it. 

The  principles  of  this  true  religion  are  so  natural  to 
men,  that  as  soon  as  they  are  put  before  them  they 
are  accepted  as  something  quite  familiar  and  self- 
evident.  For  us  the  true  religion  is  Christianity  in 
those  of  its  principles  in  which  it  agrees,  not  with  the 
external  forms,  but  with  the  basic  principles  of  Brah- 
manism, Confucianism,  Taoism,  Hebraism,  Buddhism, 
and  even  Mohammedanism.  And  just  in  the  same 
way,  for  those  who  profess  Brahmanism,  Confucianism, 
etc. — true  religion  is  that  of  which  the  basic  principles 
agree  with  those  of  all  other  religions.  And  these 
principles  are  very  simple,  intelligible  and  clear. 

These  principles  are  :  that  there  is  a  God,  the  origin 
of  all'  things ;  that  in  man  dwells  a  spark  from  that 
Divine  Origin,  which  man,  by  his  way  of  living,  can 
increase  or  decrease  in  himself ;  that  to  increase  this 
divine  spark  man  must  suppress  his  passions  and 
increase  love  in  himself ;  and  that  the  practical  means 
to  attain  this  result  is  to  do  to  others  as  you  would  they 
should  do  to  you.  All  these  principles  are  common  to 
Brahmanism,  Hebraism,  Confucianism,  and  Moham- 
medanism. (If  Buddhism  supplies  no  definition  of 
God,  it  nevertheless  acknowledges  That  with  which 
man  commingles,  and  into  Which  he  is  absorbed  when 
he  attains  to  Nirvana.  So,  That  with  which  man  com- 
mingles, or  into  Which  he  is  absorbed  in  Nirvana,  is 
the  same  Origin  that  is  called  God  in  Hebraism,  Christ- 
ianity, and  Mohammedanism.) 

'  But  that  is  not  religion,'  is  what  men  of  to-day  will 
say,  who  are  accustomed  to  consider  that  the  super- 
natural, i.e.,  the  unmeaning,  is  the  chief  sign  of 
religion.  'That  is  anything  you  like  :  philosophy, 
ethics,  ratiocination  —  but  not  religion.'  Religion, 
according  to  them,  must  be  absurd  and  unintelligible 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION?  329 

{Credo  quia  absurdum).  Yet  it  was  only  from  these 
very  principles,  or  rather  in  consequence  of  their  being 
preached  as  religious  doctrines,  that — by  a  long  process 
of  perversion — all  those  absurd  miracles  and  super- 
natural occurrences  were  elaborated,  which  are  now 
considered  to  be  the  fundamental  signs  of  every  religion. 
To  assert  that  the  supernatural  and  irrational  form  the 
essential  characteristic  of  religion  is  like  observing 
only  rotten  apples,  and  then  asserting  that  a  flabby 
bitterness  and  a  harmful  effect  on  the  stomach  are  the 
prime  characteristics  of  the  fruit  called  Apple. 

Religion  is  the  definition  of  man's  relation  to  the 
Source  of  all  things,  and  of  man's  purpose  in  life 
which  results  from  that  relation  ;  and  it  supplies  rules 
of  conduct  resulting  from  that  purpose.  And  the 
universal  religion  whose  first  principles  are  alike  in  all 
the  faiths,  fully  meets  the  demands  of  this  understand- 
ing of  religion.  It  defines  the  relation  of  man  to  God, 
as  being  that  of  a  part  to  the  whole  ;  from  this  relation 
it  deduces  man's  purpose,  which  is  to  increase  the 
divine  element  in  himself ;  and  this  purpose  involves 
practical  demands  on  man,  in  accord  with  the  rule  : 
Do  to  others  as  you  wish  them  to  do  to  you. 

People  often  doubt,  and  I  myself  at  one  time  doubted, 
whether  such  an  abstract  rule  as,  Do  to  others  as  you 
wish  them  to  do  to  you,  can  be  as  obligatory  a  rule  and 
guide  for  action  as  the  simpler  rules  :  to  fast,  pray,  and 
take  communion,  etc.  But  an  irrefutable  reply  to  that 
doubt  is  supplied,  for  instance,  by  the  spiritual  condi- 
tion of  a  Russian  peasant  who  would  rather  die  than 
spit  out  the  Sacrament  on  to  a  manure-heap,  but 
who  yet,  at  the  command  of  men,  is  ready  to  kill  his 
brothers. 

Why  should  demands  flowing  from  the  rule  of  doing 
to  others  as  you  wish  them  to  do  to  you — such,  for 
instance,  as  :  not  killing  one's  brother  man,  not  reviling, 
not  committing  adultery,  not  revenging  one's  self,  not 
taking  advantage  of  the  need  of  one's  brethren  to 
satisfy  one's  own  caprice,  and  many  others, — why 
should  not  they  be  instilled  as  forcibly,  and  become  as 


330  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

binding  and  inviolable,  as  the  belief  in  the  sanctity  of 
the  Sacraments,  or  of  images,  etc.,  now  is  to  men 
whose  faith  is  founded  more  on  credulity  than  on  any 
clear  inward  consciousness. 


The  truths  of  the  religion  common  to  all  men  of  our 
time  are  so  simple,  so  intelligible,  and  so  near  the 
heart  of  each  man,  that  it  would  seem  only  necessary 
for  parents,  rulers  and  teachers  to  instil  into  children 
and  adults — instead  of  the  obsolete  and  absurd  doc- 
trines, in  which  they  themselves  often  do  not  believe  : 
about  Trinities,  virgin-mothers,  redemptions,  Indras, 
Trimurti,  and  about  Buddhas  and  Mohammeds  who  fly 
away  into  the  sky — those  clear  and  simple  truths,  the 
metaphysical  essence  of  which  is,  that  the  spirit  of  God 
dwells  in  man  ;  and  the  practical  rule  of  which  is,  that 
man  should  do  to  others  as  he  wishes  them  to  do  to 
him — ffor  the  whole  life  of  humanity  to  change.  If 
only — in  the  same  way  that  the  belief  is  now  instilled 
into  children  and  confirmed  in  adults,  that  God  sent 
His  son  to  redeem  Adam's  sin,  and  that  He  established 
His  Church  which  must  be  obeyed ;  as  well  as  rules 
deduced  from  these  beliefs  :  telling  when  and  where  to 
pray  and  make  offerings,  when  to  refrain  from  such  and 
such  food,  and  on  what  days  to  abstain  from  work — if 
only  it  were  instilled  and  confirmed  that  God  is  a  spirit 
whose  manifestation  is  present  in  us,  the  strength  of 
which  we  can  increase  by  our  lives  :  if  only  this  and  all 
that  naturally  flows  from  this,  were  instilled  in  the 
same  way  that  quite  useless  stories  of  impossible  occur- 
rences, and  rules  of  meaningless  ceremonies  deduced 
from  those  stories,  are  now  instilled — then,  instead  of 
purposeless  strife  and  discord,  we  should  very  soon 
(without  the  aid  of  diplomatists,  international  law, 
peace-congresses,  political  economists,  and  Socialists 
in  all  their  various  subdivisions)  see  humanity  living 
a  peaceful,  united,  and  happy  life  guided  by  the  one 
religion. 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION?  331 

But  nothing  of  the  kind  is  done  :  not  only  is  the 
deception  of  false  religion  not  destroyed,  and  the  true 
one  not  preach ed,  but,  on  the  contrary,  men  depart 
further  and  further  away  from  the  possibility  of  accept- 
ing the  truth. 

The  chief  cause  of  people  not  doing  what  is  so 
natural,  necessary,  and  possible,  is  that  men  to-day, 
in  consequence  of  having  lived  long  without  religion, 
are  so  accustomed  to  establish  and  defend  their  exist- 
ence by  violence,  by  bayonets,  bullets,  prisons,  and 
gallows,  that  it  seems  to  them  as  if  such  an  arrange- 
ment of  life  were  not  only  normal,  but  were  the  only 
one  possible.  Not  only  do  those  who  profit  by  the 
existing  order  think  so,  but  those  even  who  suffer  from 
it  are  so  stupefied  by  the  hypnotism  exercised  upon 
them,  that  they  also  consider  violence  to  be  the  only 
means  of  securing  good  order  in  human  society.  Yet 
it  is  just  this  arrangement  and  maintenance  of  the 
commonweal  by  violence,  that  does  most  to  hinder 
people  from  comprehending  the  causes  of  their  suffer- 
ings, and  consequently  from  being  able  to  establish  a 
true  order. 

The  results  of  it  are  such  as  might  be  produced  by  a 
bad  or  malicious  doctor  who  should  drive  a  malignant 
eruption  inwards,  thereby  cheating  the  sick  man,  and 
making  the  disease  worse  and  its  cure  impossible. 

To  people  of  the  ruling  classes,  who  enslave  the 
masses  and  think  and  say  :  '  Apres  nous  le  deluge,*  it 
seems  very  convenient  by  means  of  the  army,  the 
priesthood,  the  soldiers,  and  the  police,  as  well  as  by 
threats  of  bayonets,  bullets,  prisons,  workhouses,  and 
gallows,  to  compel  the  enslaved  people  to  remain  in 
stupefaction  and  enslavement,  and  not  to  hinder  the 
rulers  from  exploiting  them.  And  the  ruling  men  do 
this,  calling  it  the  maintenance  of  good  order,  but  there 
is  nothing  that  so  hinders  the  establishment  of  a  good 
social  order  as  this  does.     In  reality,  far  from  being 

*  Madame  de  Pompadour's  remark,  '  After  me  (us)  the 
deluge.' 


332  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

the  establishment  of  good  order,  it  is  the  establishment 
of  evil. 

If  men  of  our  Christian  nations,  still  possessing  some 
remnants  of  those  religious  principles  which  in  spite  of 
everything  yet  live  in  the  people,  had  not  before  them 
the  continual  example  of  crime  committed  by  those  who 
have  assumed  the  duty  of  guarding  order  and  morality 
among  men — the  wars,  executions,  prisons,  taxation, 
sale  of  intoxicants  and  of  opium — they  would  never  have 
thought  of  committing  one  one-hundredth  of  the  evil 
deeds — the  frauds,  violence  and  murders — which  they 
now  commit  in  full  confidence  that  such  deeds  are 
good  and  natural  for  men  to  commit. 

The  law  of  human  life  is  such,  that  the  only  way  to 
improve  it,  whether  for  the  individual  or  for  a  society 
of  men,  is  by  means  of  inward,  moral  growth  towards 
perfection.  All  attempts  of  men  to  better  their  lives 
by  external  action — by  violence — serve  as  the  most 
efficacious  propaganda  and  example  of  evil,  and  there- 
fore not  only  do  not  improve  life,  but,  on  the  contrary, 
increase  the  evil  which,  like  a  snowball,  grows  larger 
and  larger,  and  removes  men  more  and  more  from  the 
only  possible  way  of  truly  bettering  their  lives. 

In  proportion  as  the  practice  of  violence  and  crime, 
committed  in  the  name  of  the  law  by  the  guardians  of 
order  and  morality,  becomes  more  and  more  frequent 
and  cruel,  and  is  more  and  more  justified  by  the  hypno- 
tism of  falsehood  presented  as  religion,  men  will  be 
more  and  more  confirmed  in  the  belief  that  the  law  of 
their  life  is  not  one  of  love  and  service  to  their  fellows, 
but  is  one  demanding  that  they  should  strive  with,  and 
devour,  one  another. 

And  the  more  they  are  confirmed  in  that  thought, 
which  degrades  them  to  the  plane  of  the  beasts,  the 
harder  will  it  be  to  shake  off  the  hypnotic  trance  in 
which  they  are  living,  and  to  accept  as  the  basis  of 
their  life  the  true  religion  of  our  time,  common  to  all 
humanity. 

A  vicious  circle  has  been  established  :  the  absence  of 
religion  makes  possible  an  animal  life  based  on  violence ; 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION?  333 

an  animal  life  based  on  violence  makes  emancipation 
from  hypnotism  and  an  adoption  of  true  religion  more 
and  more  impossible.  And,  therefore,  men  do  not  do 
what  is  natural,  possible  and  necessary  in  our  times  : 
do  not  destroy  the  deception  and  simulacrum  of 
religion,  and  do  not  assimilate  and  preach  the  true 
religion. 


Is  any  issue  from  this  enchanted  circle  possible,  and 
if  so,  what  is  it  ? 

At  first  it  seems  as  if  the  Governments,  which  have 
taken  on  themselves  the  duty  of  guiding  the  life  of  the 
people  for  their  benefit,  should  lead  us  out  of  this 
circle.  That  is  what  men  who  have  tried  to  alter  the 
arrangements  of  life  founded  on  violence,  and  to  replace 
them  by  a  reasonable  arrangement  based  on  mutual 
service  and  love,  have  always  supposed.  So  thought 
the  Christian  reformers,  and  the  founders  of  various 
theories  of  European  Communism,  and  so  also  thought 
the  celebrated  Chinese  reformer  Mo  Ti,*  who  for  the 
welfare  of  the  people  proposed  to  the  Government  not 
to  teach  school-children  military  sciences  and  exercises, 
and  not  to  give  rewards  to  adults  for  military  achieve- 
ments, but  to  teach  children  and  adults  the  rules  of 
esteem  and  love,  and  give  rewards  and  encouragement 
for  feats  of  love.  So  also  thought,  and  think,  many 
religious  peasant-reformers,  of  whom  I  have  known  and 
now  know  several,  beginning  with  Soutayef  and  ending 
with  an  old  man  who  has  now  five  times  presented  a 
petition  to  the  Emperor,  asking  him  to  decree  the 
abrogation  of  false  religion,  and  to  order  that  true 
Christianity  be  preached. 

It  seems  to  men  natural  that  the  Government — which 
justifies  its  existence  on  the  score  of  its  care  for  the 
welfare  of  the  people — must,  to  secure  that  welfare, 
wish  to  use  the  only  means  which  can  never  do  people 

*  Mo  Ti  (or  Mih  Teih)  lived  a  little  before  Mencius  (about 
372-289  B.C.),  who  wrote  against  the  former's  doctrine  of 
universal  love. 


334  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

any  harm,  and  can  only  produce  the  most  fruitful 
results.  Government,  however,  has  not  only  never 
taken  upon  itself  this  duty,  but,  on  the  contrary,  has 
always  and  everywhere  maintained  with  the  greatest 
jealousy  any  false,  effete  religion  prevalent  at  the  period, 
and  has  in  every  way  persecuted  those  who  have  tried 
to  inform  the  people  of  the  principles  of  true  religion. 
In  reality  this  cannot  be  otherwise  ;  for  Governments 
to  expose  the  falsity  of  the  present  religions,  and  to 
preach  the  true  one,  would  be  as  if  a  man  were  to  cut 
down  the  branch  on  which  he  is  sitting. 

But  if  Government  will  not  do  this  work,  it  would 
seem  certain  that  those  learned  men — who,  having 
freed  themselves  from  the  deception  of  false  religion, 
say  they  wish  to  serve  the  common  people  whose  labour 
has  provided  for  their  education  and  support — are 
bound  to  do  it.  But  these  men,  like  the  Government, 
do  not  do  it :  first,  because  they  consider  it  inexpedient 
to  risk  unpleasantness  and  to  suffer  the  danger  of  per- 
secution at  the  hands  of  the  ruling  classes  for  exposing 
a  fraud  which  Government  protects,  and  which,  in 
their  opinion,  will  disappear  of  itself;  secondly,  be- 
cause, considering  all  religion  to  be  an  effete  error, 
they  have  nothing  to  offer  the  people  in  place  of  the 
deception  they  are  expected  to  destroy. 

There  remain  those  great  masses  of  unlearned  men 
who  are  under  the  hypnotic  influence  of  Church  and 
Government  deception,  and  who  therefore  believe  that 
the  simulacrum  of  religion  which  has  been  instilled  into 
them  is  the  one  true  religion,  and  that  there  is  and  can  be 
no  other.  These  masses  are  under  a  constant  and  intense 
hypnotic  influence.  Generation  after  generation  they 
are  born  and  live  and  die  in  the  stupefied  condition  in 
which  they  are  kept  by  the  clergy  and  the  Govern- 
ment ;  and  if  they  free  themselves  from  that  influence, 
they  are  sure  to  fall  into  the  school  of  the  scientists 
who  deny  religion — when  their  influence  becomes  as 
useless  and  harmful  as  the  influence  of  their  teachers. 

So  that  for  some  men  the  work  is  unprofitable,  while 
for  others  it  is  impossible. 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION?  835 


It  looks  as  if  no  issue  were  possible. 

And  indeed  for  irreligious  men  there  is  not,  and  can- 
not be,  any  issue  from  this  position  ;  those  who  belong- 
to  the  higher,  governing  classes,  even  if  they  pretend 
to  be  concerned  for  the  welfare  of  the  masses,  will 
never  seriously  attempt  (guided  by  worldly  aims,  they 
cannot  do  it)  to  destroy  the  stupefaction  and  servitude 
in  which  these  masses  live,  and  which  make  it  possible 
for  the  upper  classes  to  rule  over  them.  In  the  same 
way,  men  belonging  to  the  enslaved  masses  cannot, 
while  guided  by  worldly  motives,  wish  to  make  their 
own  hard  position  harder  by  entering  on  a  struggle 
against  the  upper  classes,  to  expose  a  false  teaching 
and  to  preach  a  true  one.  Neither  of  these  sets  of  men 
have  any  motive  to  do  this,  and  if  they  are  intelligent 
they  will  never  attempt  it. 

But  it  is  otherwise  for  religious  people  :  men  such  as 
those  who — however  perverted  a  society  may  be — are 
always  to  be  found  guarding  with  their  lives  the  sacred 
fire  of  religion,  without  which  human  life  could  not  exist. 
There  are  times  (and  our  time  is  such)  when  these  men 
are  unnoticed,  when — as  among  us  in  Russia — despised 
and  derided  by  all,  their  lives  pass  unrecorded — in 
exile,  in  prisons,  and  in  penal  battalions — yet  they  live, 
and  on  them  depends  the  rational  life  of  humanity. 
And  it  is  just  these  religious  men — however  few  they 
may  be — who  alone  can  and  will  rend  asunder  that 
enchanted  circle  which  keeps  men  bound.  They  can 
do  it,  because  all  the  disadvantages  and  dangers  which 
hinder  a  worldly  man  from  opposing  the  existing  order 
of  society,  not  only  do  not  impede  a  religious  man,  but 
rather  increase  his  zeal  in  the  struggle  against  false- 
hood, and  impel  him  to  confess  by  word  and  deed  what 
he  holds  to  be  divine  truth.  If  he  belongs  to  the  ruling 
classes  he  will  not  only  not  wish  to  hide  the  truth  out 
of  regard  for  his  own  advantageous  position,  but,  on 
the  contrary,  having  come  to  hate  such  advantages,  he 
will  exert  his  whole  strength  to  free  himself  from  them, 


336  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

and  to  preach  the  truth,  for  he  will  no  longer  have  any 
other  aim  in  life  than  to  serve  God.  If  he  belongs  to 
the  enslaved,  then  in  the  same  way,  unbiassed  by  the 
wish,  common  among  those  of  his  position,  to  improve 
the  conditions  of  his  physical  life,  such  a  man  will  have 
no  aim  but  to  fulfil  the  will  of  God  by  exposing  false- 
hood and  confessing  truth  ;  and  no  sufferings  or  threats 
will  make  him  cease  to  live  in  accord  with  that  purpose 
which  he  has  recognised  in  his  life.  They  will  both 
act  thus,  as  naturally  as  a  worldly  man  exerts  himself 
and  puts  up  with  privations  to  obtain  riches,  or  to 
please  a  ruler  from  whom  he  expects  to  receive  advan- 
tages. Every  religious  man  acts  thus,  because  a  human 
soul  enlightened  by  religion  no  longer  lives  merely  by 
the  life  of  this  world,  as  irreligious  people  do,  but  lives 
an  eternal,  infinite  life,  for  which  suffering  and  death 
in  this  life  are  as  insignificant  as  are  blisters  on  his 
hands,  or  weariness  of  limbs,  to  a  ploughman  when  he 
is  ploughing  a  field. 

These  are  the  men  who  will  rend  asunder  the 
enchanted  circle  in  which  people  are  now  confined. 
However  few  such  men  there  may  be,  however  humble 
their  social  position,  however  poor  in  education  or 
ability,  as  surely  as  fire  lights  the  dry  steppe,  so  surely 
will  these  people  set  the  whole  world  aflame,  and 
kindle  all  the  hearts  of  men,  withered  by  long  lack  of 
religion,  and  now  thirsting  for  a  renewal  of  life. 

Religion  is  not  a  belief,  settled  once  for  all,  in  certain 
supernatural  occurrences  supposed  to  have  taken  place 
once  upon  a  time,  nor  in  the  necessity  for  certain 
prayers  and  ceremonies ;  nor  is  it,  as  the  scientists 
suppose,  a  survival  of  the  superstitions  of  ancient 
ignorance,  which  in  our  time  has  no  meaning  or 
application  to  life  ;  but  religion  is  a  certain  relation 
of  man  to  eternal  life  and  to  God,  a  relation  accordant 
with  reason  and  contemporary  knowledge,  and  it  is  the 
one  thing  that  alone  moves  humanity  forward  towards 
its  destined  aim. 

A  wise  Hebrew  proverb  says,  '  The  soul  of  man  is  the 
lamp  of  God/     Man  is  a  weak  and  miserable  animal 


WHAT  IS  RELIGION?  337 

until  the  light  of  God  burns  in  his  soul.  But  when 
that  light  burns  (and  it  burns  only  in  souls  enlightened 
by  religion)  man  becomes  the  most  powerful  being  in 
the  world.  Nor  can  this  be  otherwise,  for  what  then 
acts  in  him  is  no  longer  his  strength,  but  is  the  strength 
of  God. 

So  this  is  what  religion  is,  and  in  what  its  essence 
consists. 

[February,  1902.] 


XXIV 

LETTER  ON  EDUCATION 

Dear  S., 

I  was  very  glad  to  have  a  serious  conversation 
with  X.  about  the  education  of  children.  What  he 
and  I  quite  agree  about,  but  what  is  only  negative,  is 
that  children  should  be  taught  as  little  as  possible.* 
That  children  should  grow  up  without  having  learnt 
certain  subjects  is  not  nearly  so  bad  as  what  happens  to 
nearly  all  children,  especially  those  whose  education  is 
directed  by  mothers  who  do  not  know  the  subjects  their 
children  learn — viz.,  they  get  educational  indigestion 
and  come  to  detest  education.  A  child,  or  a  man,  can 
learn  when  he  has  an  appetite  for  what  he  studies. 
Without  appetite,  instruction  is  an  evil — a  terrible  evil 
causing  people  to  become  mentally  crippled.  For 
Heaven's  sake,  dear  S.,  if  you  do  not  quite  agree  with 
me,  take  my  word  for  it,  that  were  it  not  a  matter  of 
such  enormous  importance  I  would  not  write  to  you 
about  it.  Above  all,  believe  your  husband,  who  sees 
the  thing  quite  reasonably. 

But  then  comes  the  customary  reply :  If  children 
are  not  taught,  how  are  they  to  be  occupied?  Are 
they  to  play  knuckle-bones  with  the  village  children, 
and  learn  all  sorts  of  stupidities  and  nastiness  ?  With 
our  squirely  way  of  life,  this  reply  has  some  reasonable 
ground.  But  is  it  really  necessary  to  accustom  child- 
ren to  a  squirely  way  of  life,  and  to  make  them  feel 
that  all  their  requirements  are  satisfied  by  someone, 
somehow,  without  their  having  to  take  any  part  in  the 

*  This  is  meant  to  be  taken  comparatively  and  not 
absolutely.  Elsewhere  Tolstoy  has  expressed  the  opinion 
that  a  child  may  reasonably  do  lessons  for  eight  hours  a 
day ;  though  he  should  not  be  compelled  to  learn  what  ho 
does  not  wish  to  learn. 

[  338  ] 


LETTER  ON  EDUCATION  339 

work?  I  think  the  first  condition  of  a  good  education 
is  that  the  child  should  know  that  all  he  uses  does  not 
fall  from  heaven  ready-made,  but  is  produced  by  other 
people's  labour.  To  understand  that  all  he  lives  on 
comes  from  the  labour  of  other  people  who  neither 
know  nor  love  him,  is  too  much  for  a  child  (God  grant 
he  may  understand  it  when  he  is  grown  up) ;  but  to 
understand  that  the  chamber-pot  he  uses  is  emptied 
and  wiped,  without  any  pleasure,  by  a  nurse  or  a  house- 
maid, and  that  the  boots  and  goloshes  he  always  puts 
on  clean  are  cleaned  in  the  same  way — not  out  of  love 
for  him,  but  for  some  other  reason  quite  unintelligible  to 
him — is  something  he  can  and  should  understand,  and 
of  which  he  should  be  ashamed.  If  he  is  not  ashamed 
and  if  he  continues  to  use  them,  that  is  the  very  worst 
commencement  of  an  education,  and  leaves  the  deepest 
traces  for  his  whole  life.  To  avoid  that,  however,  is 
very  simple,  and  is  just  what  (to  use  poetic  language), 
standing  on  the  threshold  of  the  grave,  I  beseech  you 
to  do  for  your  children.  Let  them  do  all  they  can  for 
themselves  :  carry  out  their  own  slops,  fill  their  own 
jugs,  wash  up,  arrange  their  rooms,  clean  their  boots 
and  clothes,  lay  the  table,  etc.  Believe  me  that,  un- 
important as  these  things  may  seem,  they  are  a  hundred 
times  more  important  for  your  children's  happiness 
than  a  knowledge  of  French,  or  of  history,  etc.  It  is 
true  that  here  the  chief  difficulty  crops  up  :  children 
do  willingly  only  what  their  parents  do,  and  therefore 
I  beg  of  you,  do  these  things.  This  will  effect  two 
objects  at  once :  it  makes  it  possible  to  learn  less,  by 
filling  the  time  in  the  most  useful  and  natural  way, 
and  it  trains  the  children  to  simplicity,  to  work,  and  to 
self-dependence.  Please  do  this.  You  will  be  gratified 
from  the  first  month,  and  the  children  yet  more  so.  If 
to  this  you  can  add  work  on  the  land,  if  it  be  but  a 
kitchen-garden,  that  will  be  well ;  though  it  too  often 
becomes  a  mere  pastime.  The  necessity  of  attending 
to  one's  own  needs  and  carrying  out  one's  own  slops  is 
admitted  by  all  the  best  schools,  such  as  Bedale,  where 
the  director  of  the  school  himself  takes  a  share  in  such 

y  2 


340  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

work.  Believe  me,  that  without  that  condition  there  is 
no  possibility  of  a  moral  education,  a  Christian  educa- 
tion, or  a  consciousness  of  the  fact  that  all  men  are 
brothers  and  equals.  A  child  may  yet  understand  that 
a  grown-up  man,  his  father — a  banker  or  turner,  an 
artist  or  an  overseer,  who  by  his  work  feeds  the  whole 
family — may  free  himself  from  occupations  which  pre- 
vent his  giving  all  his  time  to  his  profitable  work.  JBut 
how  can  a  child — as  yet  untried  and  unable  to  do  any- 
thing— explain  to  himself  that  others  do  for  him  what 
he  naturally  should  do  for  himself? 

The  only  explanation  for  him  is  that  people  are 
divided  into  two  classes — masters  and  slaves  ;  and 
however  much  we  may  talk  to  him  in  words  about 
equality  and  the  brotherhood  of  man,  all  the  condi- 
tions of  his  life,  from  his  getting  up,  to  his  evening 
meal,  show  him  the  contrary. 

Not  only  does  he  cease  to  believe  what  his  elders  tell 
him  about  morality,  he  sees  in  the  depth  of  his  soul 
that  all  these  teachings  are  mendacious,  and  he  ceases 
to  believe  his  parents  and  teachers,  and  ceases  even  to 
believe  in  the  need  for  any  kind  of  morality  whatever. 

Yet  one  more  consideration.  If  it  is  not  possible  to 
do  all  that  I  have  mentioned,  at  least  one  must  set 
children  to  do  things  the  disadvantage  of  not  doing 
which  would  be  at  once  felt  by  them — e.g.,  if  one's 
clothes  and  boots  for  going  out  in  are  not  cleaned,  one 
must  not  go  out ;  if  water  has  not  been  fetched  and 
the  crockery  washed  up,  there  is  nothing  to  drink. 
Above  all,  in  this  matter  do  not  be  afraid  of  ridicule. 
Nine-tenths  of  all  the  bad  things  in  the  .world  are  done 
because  not  to  do  them  would  be  held  ridiculous. 

[1902.] 

This  letter  was  written  to  a  near  relation,  belonging  to 
the  upper  class  of  Russian  society,  in  which  the  children 
are  generally  sent  to  the  high  schools  (gymnasia),  where 
they  are  crammed  with  much  knowledge,  chiefly  in  order  to 
pass  examinations  and  to  obtain  certain  privileges  {e.g., 
diminution  of  military  service).  The  '  X.'  mentioned  is  the 
husband  of  the  lady  addressed. 


XXV 
AN  APPEAL  TO  THE  CLERGY 


Whoever  you  may  be :  popes,  cardinals,  bishops, 
superintendents,  priests,  or  pastors,  of  whatever  Church, 
forego  for  a  while  your  assurance  that  you — you  in 
particular — are  the  only  true  disciples  of  the  God 
Christ,  appointed  to  preach  his  only  true  teaching  ;  and 
remember  that  before  being  popes,  cardinals,  bishops, 
or  superintendents,  etc.,  you  are  first  of  all  men  :  that 
is,  according  to  your  own  teaching,  beings  sent  into 
this  world  by  God  to  fulfil  His  will ;  remember  this, 
and  ask  yourselves  what  you  are  doing.  Your  whole 
life  is  devoted  to  preaching,  maintaining,  and  spread- 
ing among  men  a  teaching  which  you  say  was  revealed 
to  you  by  God  Himself,  and  is,  therefore,  the  only  one 
that  is  true  and  brings  redemption. 

In  what,  then,  does  this  one  true  and  redeeming 
doctrine  that  you  preach,  consist  ?  To  whichever  one 
of  the  so-called  Christian  Churches — Roman  Catholic, 
Russo-Greek,  Lutheran,  or  Anglican — you  may  belong, 
you  acknowledge  that  your  teaching  is  quite  accurately 
expressed  in  the  articles  of  belief  formulated  at  the 
Council  of  Nicaea  sixteen  hundred  years  ago.  Those 
articles  of  belief  are  as  follows  : 

First :  There  is  a  God  the  father  (the  first  person  of 
a  Trinity),  who  has  created  the  sky  and  the  earth,  and 
all  the  angels  who  live  in  the  sky. 

Second  :  There  is  an  only  son  of  God  the  father,  not 
[  341  ] 


342  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

created,  but  born  (the  second  person  of  the  Trinity). 
Through  this  son  the  world  was  made. 

Third :  This  son,  to  save  people  from  sin  and  death 
(by  which  they  were  all  punished  for  the  disobedience 
of  their  forefather  Adam),  came  down  to  the  earth,  was 
made  flesh  by  the  Holy  Ghost  and  the  virgin  Mary,  and 
became  a  man. 

Fourth :  This  son  was  crucified  for  the  sins  of  men. 

Fifth :  He  suffered  and  was  buried,  and  rose  on  the 
third  day,  as  had  been  foretold  in  Hebrew  books. 

Sixth :  Having  gone  up  into  the  sky,  this  son  seated 
himself  at  his  father's  right  side. 

Seventh:  This  son  of  God  will,  in  due  time,  come 
again  to  the  earth  to  judge  the  living  and  the  dead. 

Eighth  :  There  is  a  Holy  Ghost  (the  third  person  of 
the  Trinity),  who  is  equal  to  the  father,  and  who  spoke 
through  the  prophets. 

Ninth  (held  by  some  of  the  largest  Churches) :  There 
is  one  holy,  infallible  Church  (or,  more  exactly,  the 
Church  to  which  he  who  makes  the  confession  belongs 
is  held  to  be  unique,  holy,  and  infallible).  This  Church 
consists  of  all  who  believe  in  it,  living  or  dead. 

Tenth  (also  for  some  of  the  largest  Churches)  :  There 
exists  a  Sacrament  of  Baptism,  by  means  of  which  the 
power  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  communicated  to  those 
who  are  baptized. 

Eleventh  :  At  the  second  coming  of  Christ,  the  souls 
of  the  dead  will  re-enter  their  bodies,  and  these  bodies 
will  be  immortal ;  and 

Twelfth  :  After  the  second  coming,  the  just  will  have 
eternal  life  in  paradise  on  a  new  earth  under  a  new  sky, 
and  sinners  will  have  eternal  life  in  the  torments  of 
hell. 

Not  to  speak  of  things  taught  by  some  of  your 
largest  Churches  (the  Roman  Catholic  and  Kusso-Greek 
Orthodox) — such  as  the  belief  in  saints,  and  in  the  good 
effects  of  bowing  to  their  bodily  remains,  and  to  repre- 
sentations of  them  as  well  as  of  Jesus  and  the  mother 
of  God — the  above  twelve  points  embrace  the  funda- 


AN  APPEAL  TO  THE  CLERGY  343 

mental  positions  of  that  truth  which  you  say  has  heen 
revealed  to  you  by  God  Himself  for  the  redemption  of 
man.  Some  of  you  preach  these  doctrines  simply  as 
they  are  expressed  ;  others  try  to  give  them  an  alle- 
gorical meaning  more  or  less  in  accord  with  present- 
day  knowledge  and  common-sense ;  but  you  all  alike 
are  bound  to  confess,  and  do  confess,  these  statements 
to  be  the  exact  expression  of  that  unique  truth  which 
God  Himself  has  revealed  to  you,  and  which  you  preach 
to  men  for  their  salvation. 


Very  well.  You  have  had  the  one  truth  capable  of 
saving  mankind  revealed  to  you  by  God  Himself.  It  is 
natural  for  men  to  strive  towards  truth,  and  when  it 
is  clearly  presented  to  them  they  are  always  glad  to 
accept  it,  and  to  be  guided  by  it. 

And,  therefore,  to  impart  this  saving  truth  revealed 
to  you  by  God  Himself,  it  would  seem  sufficient,  plainly 
and  simply,  verbally  and  through  the  Press,  to  com- 
municate it  with  reasonable  persuasion  to  those  capable 
of  receiving  it. 

But  how  have  you  preached  this  truth  ? 

From  the  time  a  society  calling  itself  the  Church 
was  formed,  your  predecessors  taught  this  truth  chiefly 
by  violence.  They  laid  down  the  truth,  and  punished 
those  who  did  not  accept  it.  (Millions  and  millions 
of  people  have  been  tortured,  killed,  and  burnt  for  not 
wishing  to  accept  it.)  This  method  of  persecution, 
which  was  evidently  not  suited  to  its  purpose,  came 
in  course  of  time  to  be  less  and  less  employed,  and  is 
now,  of  all  the  Christian  Churches,  used,  I  think,  only 
in  Russia. 

Another  means  was  through  external  action  on 
people's  feelings — by  solemnity  of  setting :  with  pic- 
tures, statues,  singing,  music,  even  dramatic  perform- 
ances, and  oratorical  art.  In  time  this  method,  also, 
began  to  be  less  and  less  used.  In  Protestant  countries 
— except  the   orator's  art — it  is  now  but  little  used 


344  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

(though  the  Salvation  Army,  which  has  devised  new 
methods  of  external  action  on  the  feelings,  supplies  an 
exception). 

But  all  the  strength  of  the  clergy  is  now  directed  to 
a  third  and  most  powerful  method,  which  has  always 
been  used,  and  is  now  with  special  jealousy  retained  by 
the  clergy  in  their  own  hands.  This  method  is  that  of 
instilling  Church  doctrine  into  people  who  are  not  in  a 
position  to  judge  of  what  is  given  them  :  for  instance, 
into  quite  uneducated  working  people  who  have  no  time 
for  thought,  and  chiefly  into  children,  who  accept  in- 
discriminately what  is  imparted  to  them  and  on  whose 
minds  it  remains  permanently  impressed. 


So  that  in  our  day  your  chief  method  of  imparting  to 
men  the  truth  God  has  revealed  to  you,  consists  in 
teaching  this  truth  to  uneducated  adults,  and  to  children 
who  do  not  reason,  but  accept  everything. 

This  teaching  generally  begins  with  what  is  called 
Scripture  History  :  that  is  to  say,  with  selected  passages 
from  the  Bible  :  the  Hebrew  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment ;  which  according  to  your  teaching  are  the  work 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  are  therefore  not  only  unques- 
tionably true,  but  also  holy.  From  this  history  your 
pupil  draws  his  first  notions  of  the  world,  of  the  life  of 
man,  of  good  and  evil,  and  of  God. 

This  Scripture  History  begins  with  a  description  of 
how  God,  the  ever-living,  created  the  sky  and  the  earth 
6,000  years  ago  out  of  nothing  ;  how  He  afterwards 
created  beasts,  fishes,  plants,  and  finally  man :  Adam, 
and  Adam's  wife,  who  was  made  of  one  of  Adam's  ribs. 
Then  it  describes  how,  fearing  lest  the  man  and  his 
wife  should  eat  an  apple  which  had  the  magic  quality  of 
giving  knowledge,  He  forbade  them  to  eat  that  apple  ; 
how,  notwithstanding  this  prohibition,  the  first  people 
ate  the  apple,  and  were  therefore  expelled  from  Para- 
dise ;  and  how  all  their  descendants  were  therefore 
cursed,  and  the  earth  was  cursed  also,  so  that  since  then 


AN  APPEAL  TO  THE  CLERGY  345 

it  has  grown  weeds.  Then  the  life  of  Adam's  de- 
scendants is  described  :  how  they  became  so  perverted 
that  God  not  only  drowned  them  all,  but  drowned  all 
the  animals  with  them,  and  left  alive  only  Noah  and  his 
family  and  the  animals  he  took  into  the  ark.  Then  it 
describes  how  God  chose  Abraham  alone  of  all  people, 
and  made  an  agreement  with  him  ;  which  agreement 
was  that  Abraham  was  to  consider  God  to  be  God,  and, 
as  a  sign  of  this,  was  to  be  circumcised.  On  His  side 
God  undertook  to  give  Abraham  a  numerous  progeny, 
and  to  patronize  him  and  all  his  offspring.  Then  it  tells 
how  God,  patronizing  Abraham  and  his  descendants, 
performed  on  their  behalf  most  unnatural  actions  called 
miracles,  and  most  terrible  cruelties.  So  that  the  whole 
of  this  history — excepting  certain  stories,  which  are 
sometimes  naive  (as  the  visit  of  God  with  two  angels  to 
Abraham,  the  marriage  of  Isaac,  and  others),  and  are 
sometimes  innocent,  but  are  often  immoral  (as  the 
swindles  of  God's  favourite,  Jacob,  the  cruelties  of 
Samson,  and  the  cunning  of  Joseph) — the  whole  of  this 
history,  from  the  plagues  Moses  called  down  upon  the 
Egyptians,  and  the  murder  by  an  angel  of  all  their 
firstborn,  to  the  lire  that  destroyed  250  conspirators, 
the  tumbling  into  the  ground  of  Korah,  Dathan,  and 
Abiram,  and  the  destruction  of  14,700  men  in  a  few 
minutes,  and  on  to  the  sawing  of  enemies  with  saws,* 
and  the  execution  of  the  priests  who  did  not  agree  with 
him  by  Elijah  (who  rode  up  into  the  sky),  and  to  the 
story  of  Elisha,  who  cursed  the  boys  that  laughed  at 
him,  so  that  they  were  torn  in  pieces  and  eaten  by  two 
bears — all  this  history  is  a  series  of  miraculous  occur- 
rences and  of  terrible  crimes,  committed  by  the  Hebrew 
people,  by  their  leaders,  and  by  God  Himself. 

*  Father  John  of  Kronstadt  having  published  an  article 
in  which  he  says  that  this  passage  shows  Tolstoy's  ignorance 
of  the  Bible,  it  may  be  well  here  to  quote  1  Chron.  xx.  3  : 
'And  he  brought  forth  the  people  that  were  therein,  and 
cut  them  with  saws,  and  with  harrows  of  iron,  and  with 
axes.  And  thus  did  David  unto  all  the  cities  of  the 
children  of  Amnion.' 


346  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

But  your  teaching  of  the  history  you  call  sacred  is 
not  limited  to  that.  Besides  the  history  of  the  Old 
Testament,  you  also  impart  the  New  Testament  to 
children  and  to  ignorant  people,  in  a  way  that  makes 
the  importance  of  the  New  Testament  consist  not  in  its 
moral  teaching,  not  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  but 
in  the  conformity  of  the  Gospels  with  the  stories  of  the 
Old  Testament,  in  the  fulfilment  of  prophecies,  and  in 
miracles,  the  movement  of  a  star,  songs  from  the  sky, 
talks  with  the  devil,  the  turning  of  water  into  wine, 
walking  on  the  water,  healings,  calling  people  back  to 
life,  and,  finally,  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  himself,  and 
his  flying  up  into  the  sky. 

If  all  these  stories,  both  from  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments,  were  taught  as  a  series  of  fairy-tales,  even 
then  hardly  any  teacher  would  decide  to  tell  them  to 
children  and  adults  he  desired  to  enlighten.  But  these 
tales  are  imparted  to  people  unable  to  reason,  as  though 
they  Were  the  most  trustworthy  description  of  the  world 
and  its  laws,  as  if  they  gave  the  truest  information 
about  the  lives  of  those  who  lived  in  former  times,  of 
what  should  be  considered  good  and  evil,  of  the  exist- 
ence and  nature  of  God,  and  of  the  duties  of  man. 

People  talk  of  harmful  books  !  But  is  there  in 
Christendom  a  book  that  has  done  more  harm  to  man- 
kind than  this  terrible  book,  called  '  Scripture  History 
from  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  ?*  And  all  the  men 
and  women  of  Christendom  have  to  pass  through  a 
course  of  this  Scripture  History  during  their  childhood, 
and  this  same  history  is  also  taught  to  ignorant  adults 
as  the  first  and  most  essential  foundation  of  knowledge 
— as  the  one,  eternal,  truth  of  God. 


You  cannot  introduce  a  foreign  substance  into  a 
living  organism  without  the  organism  suffering,  and 

*  The  reference  here  is  not  to  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments in  their  entirety  (the  extreme  value  of  many  parts  of 
which  Tolstoy  does  not  question),  but  to  a  compilation  for 
school  use,  which  is  largely  used  in  place  of  the  Bible. 


AN  APPEAL  TO  THE  CLERGY     347 

sometimes  perishing,  from  its  efforts  to  rid  itself  of  this 
foreign  substance.  What  terrible  evil  to  a  man's  mind 
must,  then,  result  from  this  rendering  of  the  teaching 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments — foreign  alike  to  present- 
day  knowledge,  and  to  common-sense,  and  to  moral 
feeling — and  instilled  into  him  at  a  time  when  he  is 
unable  to  judge,  but  accepts  all  that  is  given  him  ! 

For  a  man — into  whose  mind  has  been  introduced  as 
sacred  truths  a  belief  in  the  creation  of  the  world  out 
of  nothing  6,000  years  ago  ;  in  the  flood,  and  Noah's 
ark  which  accommodated  all  the  animals ;  in  a  Trinity ; 
in  Adam's  fall ;  in  an  immaculate  conception ;  in 
Christ's  miracles,  and  in  salvation  for  men  by  the 
sacrifice  of  his  death — for  such  a  man  the  demands  of 
reason  are  no  longer  obligatory,  and  such  a  man  cannot 
be  sure  of  any  truth.  If  the  Trinity,  and  an  immacu- 
late conception,  and  the  salvation  of  mankind  by  the 
blood  of  Jesus,  are  possible — then  anything  is  possible, 
and  the  demands  of  reason  are  not  obligatory. 

Drive  a  wedge  between  the  floor-boards  of  a  granary, 
and  no  matter  how  much  grain  you  may  pour  into  the 
granary,  it  will  not  stay  there.  Just  so  a  head  into 
which  the  wedge  has  been  driven  of  a  Trinity,  or  of  a 
God  who  became  man  and  redeemed  the  human  race 
by  his  sufferings  and  then  flew  up  into  the  sky,  can  no 
longer  grasp  any  reasonable  or  firm  understanding  of 
life. 

However. much  you  may  put  into  the  granary  which 
has  cracks  in  its  floor,  all  will  run  out.  Whatever  you 
may  put  into  a  mind  which  has  accepted  nonsense  as  a 
matter  of  faith,  nothing  will  remain  in  it. 

Such  a  man,  if  he  values  his  beliefs,  will  inevitably, 
all  his  life  long,  either  be  on  his  guard  (as  against 
something  harmful)  against  all  that  might  enlighten 
him  and  destroy  his  superstitions  ;  or — having  once 
for  all  assumed  (and  the  preachers  of  Church  doctrine 
will  always  encourage  him  in  this)  that  reason  is  the 
source  of  error — he  will  repudiate  the  only  light  given 
to  man  to  enable  him  to  find  his  path  of  life  ;  or,  most 
terrible  of  all,  he  will,  by  cunning  argumentation,  try 


348  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

to  demonstrate  the  reasonableness  of  what  is  unreason- 
able,, and,  worst  of  all,  will  discard,  together  with  the 
superstitions  that  were  instilled  into  him,  all  conscious- 
ness of  the  necessity  for  any  faith  whatever. 

In  either  of  these  three  cases,  a  man  into  whom, 
during  childhood,  meaningless  and  contradictory  asser- 
tions have  been  instilled  as  religious  truth — unless 
with  much  effort  and  suffering  he  free  himself  from 
them — is  a  man  mentally  diseased.  Such  a  man,  see- 
ing around  him  the  constantly  moving  and  changing 
facts  of  life,  cannot  without  a  feeling  of  desperation 
watch  this  movement  destroying  his  conception  of  life, 
and  cannot  but  experience  (openly  or  secretly)  an  un- 
kindly feeling  towards  those  who  co-operate  in  this 
reasonable  progress.  Nor  can  he  help  being  a  con- 
scious partisan  of  obscurity  and  lies  against  light  and 
truth. 

And  such  the  majority  of  people  in  Christendom — by 
the  inculcation  of  nonsensical  beliefs  deprived  from 
childhood  of  the  capacity  to  think  clearly  and  firmly — 
actually  are. 


Such  is  the  evil  done  to  man's  mind  by  having  it 
impregnated  with  Church  doctrines.  But  much  worse 
than  this  is  the  moral  perversion  which  that  impregna- 
tion produces  in  man's  soul.  Every  man  comes  into 
the  world  with  a  consciousness  of  his  dependence  on  a 
mysterious,  all-powerful  Source  which  has  given  him 
life,  and  consciousness  of  his  equality  with  all  men,  the 
equality  of  all  men  with  one  another,  a  desire  to  love 
and  be  loved,  and  a  consciousness  of  the  need  of 
striving  towards  perfection.  But  what  do  you  instil 
into  him  ? 

Instead  of  the  mysterious  Source  of  which  he  thinks 
with  reverence,  you  tell  him  of  an  angry,  unjust  God, 
who  executes  and  torments  people. 

Instead  of  the  equality  of  all  men,  which  the  child 
and  the  simple  man  recognise  with  all  their  being,  you 
tell  them  that  not  only  people,  but  nations,  are  unequal ; 


AN  APPEAL  TO  THE  CLERGY     349 

that  some  of  them  are  loved,  and  others  are  not  loved, 
by  God ;  and  that  some  people  are  called  by  God  to 
rule,  others  to  submit. 

Instead  of  that  wish  to  love  and  to  be  loved,  which 
forms  the  strongest  desire  in  the  soul  of  every  unper- 
verted  man,  you  teach  him  that  the  relations  between 
men  can  only  be  based  on  violence,  on  threats,  on 
executions  ;  and  you  tell  him  that  judicial  and  military 
murders  are  committed  not  only  with  the  sanction  but 
at  the  command  of  God. 

In  place  of  the  need  of  self-improvement,  you  tell 
him  that  man's  salvation  lies  in  belief  in  the  Redemp- 
tion, and  that  by  improving  himself  by  his  own  powers, 
without  the  aid  of  prayers,  sacraments  and  belief  in  the 
Redemption,  man  is  guilty  of  sinful  pride,  and  that 
for  his  salvation  man  must  trust,  not  to  his  own  reason 
but  to  the  commands  of  the  Church,  and  must  do  what 
she  decrees. 

It  is  terrible  to  think  of  the  perversion  of  thought 
and  feeling  produced  in  the  soul  of  a  child  or  an 
ignorant  adult  by  such  teaching. 


Only  to  think  of  the  things  I  know  of,  that  have 
been  done  in  Russia  during  the  sixty  years  of  my  con- 
scious life,  and  that  are  still  being  done  ! 

In  the  theological  colleges,  and  among  the  bishops, 
learned  monks  and  missionaries,  hair-splittiug  discus- 
sions of  intricate  theological  problems  are  carried  on — 
they  talk  of  reconciling  moral  and  dogmatic  teaching, 
they  dispute  about  the  development  or  immutability  of 
dogmas,  and  discuss  similar  religious  subtleties.  But 
to  the  hundred  million  populace  all  that  is  preached  is 
a  belief  in  Iberian  or  Kazan  icons  of  the  Mother  of 
God,  a  belief  in  relics,  in  devils,  in  the  redemptive 
efficacy  of  having  bread  blessed  and  placing  candles, 
and  having  prayers  for  the  dead,  etc. ;  and  not  only  is 
this  all  preached  and  practised,  but  the  inviolability  of 
these  popular  superstitions  is  guarded  with  particular 


350  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

jealousy  from  any  infringement.  A  peasant  has  but  to 
omit  to  observe  the  name's  day  of  the  local  saint,  or 
to  omit  to  invite  to  his  house  a  wonder-working  icon 
when  it  makes  the  round  of  his  village,  or  he  has  only 
to  work  on  the  Friday  before  St.  Elias's  day — and  he 
will  be  denounced,  and  prosecuted,  and  exiled.  Not 
to  speak  of  sectarians  being  punished  for  not  observing 
the  ceremonies  of  the  Church,  they  are  tried  for  even 
meeting  together  to  read  the  Gospels,  and  are  punished 
for  that.  And  the  result  of  all  this  activity  is  that 
tens  of  millions  of  people,  including  nearly  all  the 
peasant  women,  are  not  only  ignorant  of  Jesus,  but 
have  never  even  heard  who  he  was,  or  that  he  existed. 
This  is  hard  to  believe,  but  it  is  a  fact  which  anyone 
can  easily  verify  for  himself. 

Listen  to  what  is  said  by  the  bishops  and  academicians 
at  their  conferences,  read  their  magazines,  and  you 
would  think  that  the  Russian  priesthood  preaches  a 
faith  which,  even  if  it  be  backward,  is  still  a  Christian 
faith,  in  which  the  Gospel  truths  find  a  place  and  are 
taught  to  the  people.  But  watch  the  activity  of  the 
clergy  among  the  people,  and  you  will  see  that  what 
is  preached,  and  energetically  inculcated,  is  simply 
idolatry  :  the  elevation  of  icons,  blessing  of  water,  the 
carrying  from  house  to  house  of  miracle-working  ic6ns, 
the  glorification  of  relics,  the  wearing  of  crosses,  and 
so  forth ;  while  every  attempt  to  understand  the  real 
meaning  of  Christianity  is  energetically  persecuted. 

Within  my  recollection  the  Russian  labouring 
classes  have,  in  a  great  measure,  lost  the  traits  of  true 
Christianity  which  they  formerly  possessed,  but  which 
are  now  carefully  banished  by  the  clergy. 

Among  the  people  there  formerly  existed  (but  now 
only  in  out-of-the-way  districts)  Christian  legends  and 
proverbs,  verbally  handed  down  from  generation  to 
generation,  and  these  legends — such  as  the  legend  of 
Christ  wandering  in  the  guise  of  a  beggar,  of  the  angel 
who  doubted  God's  mercy,  of  the  crazy  man  who 
danced  at  a  drum-shop  ;  and  such  sayings  as  :  *  With- 
out God  one  can't  reach  the  threshold,'  '  God  is  not  in 


AN  APPEAL  TO  THE  CLERGY  351 

might,  but  in  right/  '  Live  till  eve,  live  for  ever/  etc. 
— these  legends  and  proverbs  formed  the  spiritual  food 
of  the  people. 

Besides  these,  there  were  Christian  customs :  to 
have  pity  on  a  criminal  or  a  wanderer,  to  give  of  one's 
last  resources  to  a  beggar,  and  to  ask  forgiveness  of  a 
man  one  has  offended. 

All  this  is  now  forgotten  and  discarded.  It  is  now 
all  replaced  by  learning  by  rote  the  Catechism,  the 
triune  composition  of  the  Trinity,  prayers  before 
lessons,  and  prayers  for  teachers  and  for  the  Tsar,  etc. 
So,  within  my  recollection,  the  people  have  grown  ever 
religiously  coarser  and  more  coarse. 

One  part — most  of  the  women — remain  as  super- 
stitious as  they  were  600  years  ago,  but  without 
that  Christian  spirit  which  formerly  permeated  their 
lives  ;  the  other  part,  which  knows  the  Catechism  by 
heart,  are  absolute  atheists.  And  all  this  is  consciously 
brought  about  by  the  clergy. 

'But  that  applies  to  Russia/  is  what  Western 
Europeans — Catholics  and  Protestants — will  say.  But 
I  think  that  the  same,  if  not  worse,  is  happening  in 
Catholicism,  with  its  prohibition  of  the  Gospels  and  its 
Notre-Dames  ;  and  in  Protestantism,  with  its  holy 
idleness  on  the  Sabbath  day,  and  its  bibliolatry — that 
is,  its  blind  belief  in  the  letter  of  the  Bible.  I  think, 
in  one  form  or  another,  it  is  the  same  throughout  the 
quasi-Christian  world. 

In  proof  of  this,  it  is  sufficient  to  remember  the  age- 
old  fraud  of  the  flame  that  kindles  in  Jerusalem  on  the 
day  of  the  Resurrection,  and  which  no  one  of  the 
Church  people  exposes  ;  or  the  faith  in  the  Redemption, 
which  is  preached  with  peculiar  energy  in  the  very 
latest  phases  of  Christian  Protestantism. 


But  not  only  is  the  Church  teaching  harmful  by  its 
irrationality  and  immorality,  it  is  specially  harmful 
because  people  professing  this  teaching,  while  living* 


352  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

without  any  moral  demands  to  restrain  them,  feel 
quite  convinced  they  are  living  a  really  Christian 
life. 

People  live  in  insensate  luxury,  obtaining  their 
wealth  by  the  labour  of  the  humble  poor,  and  defend- 
ing themselves  and  their  riches  by  policemen,  law- 
courts  and  executions — and  the  clergy,  in  the  name  of 
Christ,  approve,  sanctify,  and  bless  this  way  of  life, 
merely  advising  the  rich  to  allot  a  small  part  of  what 
they  have  stolen  to  the  service  of  those  from  whom  they 
continue  to  steal.  (When  slavery  existed,  the  clergy 
always  and  everywhere  justified  it,  and  did  not  consider 
it  inconsistent  with  Christianity.) 

People  strive  by  force  of  arms,  by  murder,  to  attain 
their  covetous  aims,  personal  or  public,  and  the  clergy 
approve,  and  in  Christ's  name  bless  preparations  for 
war,  and  war  itself,  and  not  only  approve,  but  often 
encourage  these  things  ;  holding  war — that  is,  murder 
— notf  to  be  contrary  to  Christianity. 

People  who  believe  in  such  teaching  are  not  merely 
led  by  it  into  an  evil  way  of  life,  but  are  fully  persuaded 
that  their  evil  life  is  a  good  one,  which  there  is  no  need 
for  them  to  alter. 

Nor  is  that  all :  the  chief  evil  of  this  teaching  is,  that 
it  is  so  skilfully  interwoven  with  the  external  forms  of 
Christianity,  that,  while  professing  it,  people  think 
your  doctrine  is  the  one  true  Christianity,  and  that 
there  is  no  other  !  It  is  not  only  that  you  have 
diverted  from  men  the  spring  of  living  water — were 
that  all,  people  might  still  find  it — but  you  have 
poisoned  it  with  your  teachings,  so  that  people  cannot 
find  any  Christianity  but  this  one  poisoned  by  your 
interpretations. 

The  Christianity  preached  by  you  is  an  inoculation  of 
false  Christianity,  resembling  the  inoculation  for  small- 
pox or  diphtheria,  and  has  the  effect  of  making  those 
who  are  inoculated  immune  to  true  Christianity. 

People  having  for  many  generations  built  their  lives 
on  foundations  irreconcilable  with  true  Christianity, 
feel  fully  persuaded  that  they  are    living   Christian 


AN  APPEAL  TO  THE  CLERGY     353 

lives,   and  thus  they  are   unable   to   return   to   true 
Christianity. 


Thus  it  is  with  those  who  profess  your  doctrines ; 
but  there  are  others,  who  have  emancipated  them- 
selves from  those  doctrines  :  the  so-called  unbelievers. 

They  (though  in  most  cases  more  moral  in  their  lives 
than  the  majority  of  those  who  profess  Church  doc- 
trines), as  a  result  of  the  spiritual  taint  to  which  they 
were  exposed  in  their  childhood,  have  an  influence 
on  their  neighbours  which  is  worse  even  than  that  of 
those  who  profess  your  teachings.  They  are  specially 
harmful  because,  having  in  childhood  snared  the  mis- 
fortune of  the  rest  of  the  inhabitants  of  Christendom 
and  been  trained  in  the  Church  frauds,  they  have  so 
identified  Church  teachings  with  Christianity  in  their 
own  perception,  that  they  now  cannot  distinguish  the 
one  from  the  other,  and  in  rejecting  the  false  Church 
teaching  throw  away  with  it  that  true  Christian  teach- 
ing which  it  has  hidden. 

These  people,  detesting  the  fraud  that  has  caused 
them  so  much  suffering,  preach  not  only  the  useless- 
ness  but  the  harmfulness  of  Christianity,  and  not  of 
Christianity  only,  but  of  any  religion  whatever. 

Religion,  in  their  perception,  is  a  remnant  of  super- 
stition, which  may  have  been  of  use  to  people  once,  but 
now  is  simply  harmful.  And  so  their  doctrine  is,  that 
the  quicker  and  more  completely  people  free  themselves 
from  every  trace  of  religious  consciousness,  the  better 
it  will  be. 

And  preaching  this  emancipation  from  all  religion, 
they — including  among  them  most  educated  and  learned 
men,  who,  therefore,  have  the  greatest  authority  with 
people  searching  for  the  truth — consciously  or  un- 
consciously become  most  harmful  preachers  of  moral 
laxity. 

By  suggesting  to  people  that  the  most  important 
mental  characteristic  of  rational  creatures — that  of 
ascertaining  their  relation  to  the  Source  of  all  things, 


354  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

from  which  alone  any  firm  moral  laws  can  be  deduced 
— is  something  man  has  outlived,  the  deniers  of 
religion  involuntarily  postulate  as  the  basis  of  human 
activity  simply  self-love,  and  the  bodily  appetites  that 
flow  therefrom. 

And  among  these  people  sprang  up  that  teaching  of 
egotism,  evil  and  hatred,  which  (though  it  was  always 
present  in  hidden,  latent  form  in  the  life-conception  of 
the  materialists)  at  first  showed  itself  timidly,  but  has 
latterly  been  so  vividly  and  deliberately  expressed  in 
the  doctrines  of  Nietzsche,  and  is  now  spreading  so 
rapidly,  evoking  the  most  coarsely  animal  and  cruel 
instincts  in  mankind. 

So  that,  on  the  one  hand,  the  so-called  believers  find 
complete  approval  of  their  evil  way  of  life  in  your 
teaching,  which  recognises  as  compatible  with  Christ- 
ianity those  actions  and  conditions  which  are  most 
contrary  to  it ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  unbelievers 
— arriving  at  the  denial  of  all  religion,  as  a  consequence 
of  your  teaching — wipe  out  all  distinction  between  good 
and  evil,  preach  a  doctrine  of  inequality  among  men,  of 
egotism,  of  strife,  and  of  the  oppression  of  the  weak  by 
the  strong — and  preach  this  as  the  highest  truth  attain- 
able by  man. 


You,  and  none  but  you,  by  your  teaching  forcibly 
instilled  into  people,  are  the  cause  of  this  dreadful  evil 
from  which  they  suffer  so  cruelly. 

Most  terrible  of  all  is  the  fact  that,  while  causing 
this  evil,  you  do  not  believe  the  teaching  you  preach  ; 
not  only  do  not  believe  all  the  assertions  of  which  it  is 
composed,  but  often  do  not  believe  a  single  one  of 
them. 

I  know  that,  repeating  the  celebrated  credo  quia 
absurdum,  many  of  you  think  that,  in  spite  of  every- 
thing, you  do  believe  all  that  you  preach.  But  the 
fact  that  you  say  you  believe  that  God  is  a  Trinity,  or 
that  the  heavens  opened  and  the  voice  of  God  spoke 
from  up  there,  or  that  Jesus  rose  up  into  the  hea\en> 


AN  APPEAL  TO  THE  CLERGY  355 

and  will  come  from  there  to  judge  all  mankind  in  their 
bodies,,  does  not  prove  that  you  really  believe  that  the 
things  mentioned  have  occurred,  or  will  occur.  You 
believe  you  ought  to  say  that  you  believe  these  things 
happened.  But  you  do  not  believe  them  ;  for  the 
assertions  that  God  is  One  and  Three  ;  that  Jesus  flew 
up  into  the  sky  and  will  come  back  from  there  to 
judge  those  who  will  rise  in  their  bodies — have,  for 
you,  no  meaning.  One  may  utter  words  that  have  no 
sense,  but  one  cannot  believe  what  has  no  sense.  It  is 
possible  to  believe  that  the  souls  of  the  dead  will  pass 
into  other  forms  of  life,  pass  into  animals,  or  that  the 
annihilation  of  the  passions,  or  the  attainment  of  love, 
is  the  destiny  of  man  ;  or  it  is  possible  to  believe  simply 
that  God  has  forbidden  us  to  kill  men,  or  even  that  He 
forbids  us  to  eat — and  many  other  things  may  be 
believed  that  do  not  involve  self-contradiction  :  but 
one  cannot  believe  that  God  is,  at  the  same  time,  both 
One  and  also  Three,  or  that  the  sky — which  for  us  is 
no  longer  a  thing  that  exists — opened,  etc. 

The  people  of  former  ages,  who  framed  these  dogmas, 
could  believe  in  them,  but  you  can  no  longer  do  so. 
If  you  say  you  have  faith  in  them,  you  say  so  only 
because  you  use  the  word  '  faith '  in  one  sense,  while 
you  apply  to  it  another.  One  meaning  of  the  word 
'  faith '  refers  to  a  relation  adopted  by  man  towards 
God,  which  enables  him  to  define  the  meaning  of  his 
whole  life,  and  guides  all  his  conscious  actions.  Another 
meaning  of  the  word  c  faith '  is  the  credulous  accept- 
ance of  assertions  made  by  a  certain  person  or  persons. 

In  the  first  sense,  the  objects  of  faith — though  the 
definition  of  man's  relation  to  God  and  to  the  world  is 
generally  accepted  as  framed  by  those  who  lived  pre- 
viously— are  verified  and  accepted  by  reason. 

But  in  the  second  sense,  the  objects  of  faith  are  not 
only  accepted  independently  of  reason,  but  are  accepted 
on  the  absolute  condition  that  reason  is  not  to  be 
allowed  to  question  what  is  asserted. 

On  this  double  meaning  of  the  word  '  faith 9  is 
founded  that  misunderstanding  which  enables  people  to 

z  2 


356  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

say  they  believe,  or  have  ( faith/  in  propositions  devoid 
of  sense  or  involving  a  contradiction  in  terms.  And 
the  fact  that  you  are  blindly  credulous  towards  your 
teachers  is  no  proof  that  you  have  faith  in  what — 
being  senseless  and,  therefore,  supplying  no  meaning 
either  to  your  imagination  or  your  reason — cannot  be 
an  object  of  faith. 

The  well-known  preacher,  Pere  Didon,  in  the  intro- 
duction to  his  Vie  de  Jesus-Christ,  announces  that  he 
believes,  not  in  some  allegorical  sense  but  plainly, 
without  explanations,  that  Christ,  having  risen,  was 
carried  up  into  the  sky,  and  sits  there  at  the  right  hand 
of  his  father. 

An  illiterate  Samara  peasant  of  my  acquaintance,  in 
reply  to  the  question  whether  he  believed  in  God, 
simply  and  firmly  replied,  as  his  priest  told  me  :  '  No, 
sinner  that  1  am,  I  don't  believe/  His  disbelief  in  God 
the  peasant  explained  by  saying  that  one  could  not  live 
as  he  was  living  if  one  believed  in  God  :  c  One  scolds, 
and  grudges  help  to  a  beggar,  and  envies,  and  over-eats, 
and  drinks  strong  drinks.  Could  one  do  such  things  if 
one  believed  in  God  P 

Pere  Didon  affirms  that  he  has  faith  both  in  God  and 
in  the  ascension  of  Jesus,  while  the  Samara  peasant 
says  he  does  not  believe  in  God,  since  he  does  not  obey 
His  commandments. 

Evidently  Pere  Didon  does  not  even  know  what  faith 
is,  and  only  says  he  believes  :  while  the  Samara  peasant 
knows  what  faith  is,  and,  though  he  says  he  does  not 
believe  in  God,  really  believes  in  Him  in  the  very  way 
that  is  true  faith. 


But  I  know  that  arguments  addressed  to  the  intellect 
do  not  persuade — only  feeling  persuades,  and  therefore, 
leaving  arguments  aside,  I  appeal  to  you — whoever  you 
may  be  :  popes,  bishops,  archdeacons,  priests,  or  what 
not — 1  appeal  to  your  feelings  and  to  your  conscience. 

For  you  know  that  what  you  teach  about  the  creation 
of  the  world,  about  the  inspiration  of  the  Bible  by  God, 


AN  APPEAL  TO  THE  CLERGY     357 

and  much  else,  is  not  true  ;  how  then  can  you  teach  it 
to  little  children  and  to  ignorant  adults,  who  look  to 
you  for  true  enlightenment  ? 

Ask  yourself,  with  your  hand  on  your  heart,  do  you 
believe  what  you  preach  ?  If  you  really  ask  yourself 
that  question,  not  before  men  but  before  God,  remem- 
bering the  approaching  hour  of  death,  you  cannot  but 
answer,  ' No,  I  do  not  believe  it.'  You  do  not  believe 
in  the  inspiration  by  God  of  the  whole  of  those  writings 
which  you  call  sacred :  you  do  not  believe  all  the 
horrors  and  wonders  of  the  Old  Testament,  you  do  not 
believe  in  hell,  you  do  not  believe  in  an  immaculate 
conception,  in  the  resurrection  and  ascension  of  Christ, 
you  do  not  believe  in  the  physical  resurrection  of  the 
dead,  and  in  the  triune  personality  of  God — not  only 
do  you  not  believe  all  the  articles  of  the  creed  which 
expresses  the  essence  of  your  faith,  but  many  of  you  do 
not  even  believe  a  single  one  of  them. 

Disbelief,  if  but  in  a  single  dogma,  involves  disbelief 
in  the  infallibility  of  the  Church  which  has  set  up  the 
dogma  you  do  not  believe.  But  if  you  have  not  faith 
in  the  Church,  you  will  not  believe  in  the  dogmas  she 
set  up. 

If  you  do  not  believe,  if  even  you  have  any  doubts, 
think  what  you  are  doing  in  preaching  as  divine,  un- 
questionable truth — what  you  do  not  yourselves  believe  : 
and  in  preaching  it  by  methods  which  are  exceptional 
and  unfair  :  methods  such  as  you  employ.  And  do  not 
say  you  cannot  take  on  yourselves  the  responsibility  of 
depriving  people  of  intimate  union  with  the  great  or 
small  number  of  your  co-religionists.  That  is  not  fair. 
By  instilling  into  them  your  special  faith,  you  are  doing 
just  what  you  say  you  do  not  wish  to  do  :  you  are  de- 
priving people  of  their  natural  union  with  all  mankind, 
and  are  confining  them  within  the  narrow  limits  of  your 
single  sect,  thereby  involuntarily  and  inevitably  placing 
them,  if  not  in  a  hostile,  at  least  in  an  alien  attitude 
towards  everyone  else. 

I  know  that  you  do  not  consciously  do  this  terrible 
thing.     I  know  that  you  yourselves,  for  the  most  part, 


358  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

are  entangled,  hypnotized,  and  often  so  situated  that 
for  you  to  confess  the  truth  would  mean  to  condemn 
all  your  former  activity,  the  activity  sometimes  of 
several  decades.  I  know  how  difficult,  just  for  you, 
with  the  training  you  have  had,  and  especially  with  the 
assurance  common  among  you,  that  you  are  the  infal- 
lible successors  of  the  God-Christ — I  know  how  difficult 
it  will  be  for  you  to  face  sober  realities  and  to  confess 
yourselves  wandering  sinners,  engaged  in  one  of  the 
worst  activities  a  man  can  possibly  pursue. 

I  know  all  the  difficulties  of  your  position ;  but  re- 
membering the  words  of  the  Gospels  you  acknowledge 
as  divine — that  God  rejoices  more  over  one  sinner  that 
repenteth  than  over  a  hundred  righteous  persons — I 
think  that  for  each  one  of  you,  whatever  his  position 
maybe,  it  should  be  easier  to  repent,  and  to  cease  to 
take  part  in  what  you  are  doing,  than,  not  believing,  to 
continue  to  do  it. 

Whoever  you  may  be :  popes,  cardinals,  metropoli- 
tans, archbishops,  bishops,  superintendents,  priests,  or 
pastors — think  of  this. 

If  you  belong  to  those  of  the  clergy — of  whom  there 
are  unfortunately  in  our  days  very  many  (and  continu- 
ally more  and  more) — who  see  clearly  how  obsolete, 
irrational,  and  immoral  is  the  Church  teaching,  but 
who,  without  believing  in  it,  still  from  personal  motives 
(for  their  salaries  as  priests  or  bishops)  continue  to 
preach  it,  do  not  console  yourself  with  the  supposition 
that  your  activity  is  justified  by  any  utility  it  has  for 
the  masses  of  the  people,  who  do  not  yet  understand 
what  you  understand. 

Falsehood  cannot  be  useful  to  anyone.  What  you 
know — that  falsehoods  are  falsehoods — could  be  known 
equally  by  the  common  man  whom  you  have  indoctri- 
nated, and  are  indoctrinating,  with  them,  and  he  might 
be  free  from  them.  Not  only  might  he,  but  for  you, 
free  himself  from  these  falsehoods — he  might  find  the 
truth  which  Christ  has  shown,  and  which  by  your 
doctrines  you — standing  between  the  common  man  and  , 
his  God — have  hidden  away.    What  you  are  doing,  you 


AN  APPEAL  TO  THE  CLERGY  359 

are  doing  not  to  serve  man,  but  only  from  ambition  or 
covetousness. 

Therefore,  however  magnificent  may  be  the  palaces 
in  which  you  live,  the  churches  in  which  you  officiate 
and  preach,  and  the  vestments  in  which  you  adorn 
yourselves,  your  occupation  is  not  made  better  by  these 
things.  c  That  which  is  highly  esteemed  among  men 
is  an  abomination  in  the  sight  of  God.* 

So  it  is  with  those  who,  not  believing,  continue  to 
preach  what  is  false,  and  to  strengthen  men  in  it. 

But  there  are  among  you  those  also — and  their 
number  is  continually  increasing — who,  though  they 
see  the  bankrupt  position  of  the  Church  creeds  in  our 
day,  cannot  make  up  their  minds  to  examine  them 
critically.  Belief  has  been  so  instilled  into  them  in 
childhood,  and  is  so  strongly  supported  by  their 
environment  and  by  the  influence  of  the  crowd,  that 
they  (without  even  trying  to  free  themselves  from  it) 
devote  all  the  strength  of  their  minds  and  education  to 
justify,  by  cunning  allegories  and  false  and  confused 
reasonings,  the  incompatibilities  and  contradictions  of 
the  creed  they  profess. 

If  you  belong  to  this  class  of  clergy,  which  though 
less  guilty  is  even  more  harmful  than  the  class  pre- 
viously mentioned,  do  not  imagine  that  your  reasonings 
will  quiet  your  conscience  or  justify  you  before  God. 
In  the  depth  of  your  soul  you  cannot  but  know  that  all 
you  can  devise  and  invent  will  not  make  the  immoral 
stories  of  Scripture  history — which  are  nowadays  in 
opposition  to  man's  knowledge  and  understanding — or 
the  archaic  affirmations  of  the  Nicene  Creed,  either 
moral,  reasonable,  clear,  or  accordant  with  contempo- 
rary knowledge  and  common-sense. 

You  know  that  you  cannot  by  your  arguments  con- 
vince anyone  of  the  truth  of  your  faith,  and  that  no 
fresh,  grown-up,  educated  man,  not  trained  from  child- 
hood to  your  belief,  can  believe  you ;  but  that  such  a 
man  will  either  laugh,  or  will  suppose  you  to  be  men- 
tally afflicted,  when  he  hears  your  account  of  the  com- 
mencement of  the  world,  of  the  first  man,  of  Adam's 


360  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

sin,  and  of  the  redemption  of  man  by  the  death  of  the 
son  of  God. 

All  you  can  effect  by  your  false,  pseudo-scientific 
argumentations,  and  (what  counts  for  more)  by  your 
authority,  will  be  temporarily  to  retain  in  hypnotic 
submission  to  a  false  faith,  those  who  are  awakening 
from  its  influence  and  preparing  to  free  themselves 
from  it. 

That  is  what  you  are  doing ;  and  it  is  a  very  evil 
work.  Instead  of  employing  your  mental  powers  to 
free  yourselves  and  others  from  the  fraud  you  and  they 
are  involved  in,  and  which  causes  you  and  them  to 
suffer,  you  use  your  powers  yet  further  to  entangle 
yourselves  and  them. 

You,  the  clergy  of  this  class,  should  not  entangle 
yourselves  and  others  by  obscure  argumentation,  should 
not  try  to  demonstrate  that  truth  is  what  you  call  truth ; 
but,  on  the  contrary,  making  an  effort,  you  should  try 
to  verify  the  beliefs  you  have  accepted  as  truth — by 
comparing  them  with  what  you  and  everyone  else  accept 
as  sure  knowledge,  and  also  by  the  simple  demands  of 
common-sense.  You  need  only  sincerely  set  your- 
selves that  task,  and  you  will  at  once  awake  from  the 
hypnotic  sleep  in  which  you  now  are — and  the  terrible 
delusion  in  which  you  have  lived  will  become  clear 
to  you. 

So  it  is  with  this  second  class,  the  philosophizing 
clergy,  who  in  our  day  are  very  numerous  and  most 
harmful. 

But  there  is  also  a  third,  most  numerous,  class  of 
simple-minded  clergy  who  have  never  doubted  the 
truth  of  the  faith  they  profess  and  preach.  These  men 
have  either  never  thought  about  the  sense  and  meaning 
of  the  affirmations  taught  them  in  their  childhood  as 
sacred  divine  truth  ;  or,  if  they  have  thought,  were  so 
unaccustomed  to  independent  thinking,  that  they  did 
not  see  the  incompatibilities  and  contradictions  in- 
volved in  those  affirmations,  or,  seeing  them,  were  yet 
so  overpowered  by  the  authority  of  the  Church  tradi- 
tion that  they  have  not  dared  to  think  otherwise  than 


AN  APPEAL  TO  THE  CLERGY     361 

as  former  and  present  ecclesiastics  have  thought. 
These  men  generally  console  themselves  with  the 
thought  that  Church  doctrine  probably  has  some  satis- 
factory explanation  of  the  incompatibilities  which  (as 
they  suppose)  only  appear  incompatibilities  to  them 
owing  to  their  own  deficiency  in  theological  erudition. 

If  you  belong  to  that  class  of  men — sincerely  and 
naively  believing,  or  who,  though  they  do  not  believe 
are  yet  willing  to  believe,  and  are  oblivious  of  the 
obstacles  to  so  doing — whether  you  are  an  already 
ordained  priest,  or  a  young  man  only  preparing  for  the 
priesthood,  pause  for  a  while  in  your  activity  or  in  your 
preparations  for  that  activity,  and  consider  what  you 
are  doing  or  are  about  to  do. 

You  are  preaching,  or  are  preparing  to  preach,  a 
teaching  which  will  define  for  men  the  meaning  of  their 
life,  will  define  its  aim,  will  indicate  the  features  of 
good  and  evil,  and  will  give  direction  to  all  their 
activity.  And  this  teaching  you  preach  not  as  any 
other  human  doctrine — imperfect  and  open  to  question 
— but  as  a  teaching  revealed  by  God  Himself,  and 
therefore  not  to  be  questioned  ;  and  you  preach  it  not 
in  a  book  or  ordinary  conversation,  but  either  to  chil- 
dren— at  an  age  when  they  cannot  understand  the 
meaning  of  what  is  conveyed  to  them,  but  when  it  all 
stamps  itself  indelibly  on  their  consciousness — or  you 
preach  it  to  ignorant  adults  unable  to  weigh  the  instruc- 
tion you  give  them. 

Such  is  your  activity,  or  for  such  activity  you  are 
preparing. 

But  what  if  this  that  you  teach,  or  are  preparing  to 
teach,  be  untrue  ? 

Is  it  possible  that  this  cannot  be,  or  must  not  be,  con- 
sidered? If  you  consider  it  and  compare  this  teaching 
with  other  teachings  claiming  to  be  equally  unique  and 
infallible,  and  compare  it  with  what  you  yourselves 
know,  and  with  common-sense ;  if,  in  a  word,  you 
consider  it,  not  in  a  spirit  of  blind  credulity,  but  freely 
— you  cannot  fail  to  see  that  what  has  been  given  to 
you  as  sacred  truth,  is  not  only  not  sacred  truth,  but  is 


362  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

simply  an  obsolete  and  superstitious  belief,  which,  like 
other  similar  beliefs,  is  maintained  and  preached  by 
men  not  for  the  benefit  of  their  brother-men  but  for 
some  other  object.  And  as  soon  as  you  have  under- 
stood that,  all  those  of  you  who  look  on  life  seriously 
and  attend  to  the  voice  of  conscience,  will  be  unable  to 
continue  to  preach  this  doctrine,  or  to  prepare  to 
preach  it. 


But  I  hear  the  usual  reply  :  '  What  will  become  of 
men  if  they  cease  to  believe  the  Church  doctrines? 
Won't  things  be  worse  than  they  now  are  P 

What  will  happen  if  the  people  of  Christendom  cease 
to  believe  in  Church  doctrine  ?  The  result  will  be — 
that  not  the  Hebrew  legends  alone,  but  the  religious 
wisdom  of  the  whole  world,  will  become  accessible  and 
intelligible  to  them.  People  will  grow  up  and  develop 
with  unperverted  understandings  and  feelings.  Having 
discarded  a  teaching  accepted  credulously,  people  will 
order  their  relation  towards  God  reasonably,  in  con- 
formity with  their  knowledge ;  and  will  recognise  the 
moral  obligations  flowing  from  that  relation. 

'  But  will  not  the  results  be  worse  ?' 

If  the  Church  doctrine  is  not  true — how  can  it  be 
worse  for  men  not  to  have  falsehood  preached  to  them 
as  truth,  especially  in  a  way  so  unfair  as  is  now  adopted 
for  the  purpose  ? 

'  But,'  some  people  say,  '  the  common  folk  are  coarse 
and  uneducated ;  and  what  we,  educated  people,  do  not 
require,  may  yet  be  useful  and  even  indispensable  for 
the  masses/ 

If  all  men  are  made  alike,  then  all  must  travel  one 
and  the  same  path  from  darkness  to  light,  from  ignor- 
ance to  knowledge,  from  falsehood  to  truth.  You 
have  travelled  that  road  and  have  attained  conscious- 
ness of  the  unreliability  of  the  belief  in  which  you 
were  trained.  By  what  right,  then,  will  you  check 
others  from  making  the  same  advance  ? 

You  say,  that  though  you  do  not  need  such  food,  it 


AN  APPEAL  TO  THE  CLERGY     363 

is  needed  by  the  masses.  But  no  wise  man  undertakes 
to  decide  the  physical  food  another  must  eat ;  how, 
then,  can  it  be  decided — and  who  can  decide — what 
spiritual  food  the  masses  of  the  people  must  have  ? 

The  fact  that  you  notice  among  the  people  a  demand 
for  this  doctrine,  in  no  way  proves  that  the  demand 
ought  to  be  supplied.  There  exists  a  demand  for 
intoxicants  and  tobacco — and  other  yet  worse  demands. 
And  the  fact  is  that  you  yourselves,  by  complex  methods 
of  hypnotization,  evoke  this  very  demand,  by  the  exist- 
ence of  which  you  try  to  justify  your  own  occupation. 
Only  cease  to  evoke  the  demand,  and  it  will  not  exist ; 
for,  as  in  your  own  case  so  with  everyone  else,  there 
can  be  no  demand  for  lies,  but  all  men  have  moved  and 
still  move  from  darkness  to  light ;  and  you,  who  stand 
nearer  to  the  light,  should  try  to  make  it  accessible  to 
others,  and  not  to  hide  it  from  them. 

'  But/  I  hear  a  last  objection,  '  will  the  result  not  be 
worse  if  we — educated,  moral  men,  who  desire  to  do 
good  to  the  people — abandon  our  posts  because  of  the 
doubts  that  have  arisen  in  our  souls,  and  let  our  places 
be  taken  by  coarse,  immoral  men,  indifferent  to  the 
people's  good  ?' 

Undoubtedly  the  abandonment  of  the  clerical  profes- 
sion by  the  best  men,  will  have  the  effect  that  the 
ecclesiastical  business  passing  into  coarse,  immoral 
hands,  will  more  and  more  disintegrate,  and  expose  its 
own  falseness  and  harmfulness.  But  the  result  will 
not  be  worse,  for  the  disintegration  of  ecclesiastical 
establishments  is  now  going  on,  and  is  one  of  the 
means  by  which  people  are  being  liberated  from  the 
fraud  in  which  they  have  been  held.  And,  therefore, 
the  quicker  this  emancipation  is  accomplished,  by 
enlightened  and  good  men  abandoning  the  clerical 
profession,  the  better  it  will  be.  And  so,  the  greater 
the  number  of  enlightened  and  good  men  who  leave 
the  clerical  profession,  the  better. 

So  from  whichever  side  you  look  at  your  activity, 
that  activity  remains  harmful,  and  therefore  all  those 
among  you  who  still  fear  God  and  have  not  quite  stifled 


364  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

the  voice  of  conscience,  cannot  do  otherwise  than  exert 
all  your  strength  to  release  yourselves  from  the  false 
position  in  which  you  are  placed. 

I  know  that  many  of  you  are  encumbered  with 
families,  or  are  dependent  on  parents  who  require  you 
to  follow  the  course  you  have  begun ;  I  know  how 
difficult  it  is  to  abandon  a  post  that  brings  honour  or 
wealth,  or  even  gives  a  competence  and  enables  you 
and  your  families  to  continue  a  life  to  which  you  are 
accustomed,  and  I  know  how  painful  it  is  to  go  against 
relations  one  loves.  But  anything  is  better  than  to  do 
what  destroys  your  own  soul  and  injures  your  fellow 
men. 

Therefore,  the  sooner  and  more  definitely  you  repent 
of  your  sin  and  cease  your  activity,  the  better  it  will  be 
not  only  for  others,  but  for  yourselves. 

That  is  what  I — standing  now  on  the  brink  of  my 
grave,  and  clearly  seeing  the  chief  source  of  human  ills 
—  wished  to  say  to  you  ;  and  to  say,  not  in  order  to 
expose  or  condemn  you  (I  know  how  imperceptibly  you 
were  yourselves  led  into  the  snare  which  has  made  you 
what  you  are),  but  I  wished  to  say  it  in  order  to 
co-operate  in  the  emancipation  of  men  from  the  terrible 
evil  which  the  preaching  of  your  doctrine  produces  by 
obscuring  the  truth :  and  at  the  same  time  I  wished  to 
help  you  to  rouse  yourselves  from  the  hypnotic  sleep 
in  which  now  you  often  fail  to  understand  all  the 
wickedness  of  your  own  actions. 

May  God,  who  sees  your  hearts,  help  you  in  the 
effort. 

[November  1,  o.s.,  1902.] 


XXVI 

THOUGHTS  SELECTED  FROM  PRIVATE 
LETTERS 

Two  Views  of  Life. 

There  are  only  two  strictly  logical  views  of  life  :  one, 
a  false  one,  which  understands  life  to  mean  those 
visible  phenomena  that  occur  in  our  bodies  from  the 
time  of  birth  to  the  time  of  death  ;  the  other,  a  true 
one,  which  understands  life  to  be  the  invisible  con- 
sciousness which  dwells  within  us.  One  view  is  false, 
the  other  true,  but  both  are  logical. 

The  first  of  these  views,  the  false  one,  which  under- 
stands life  to  mean  the  phenomena  visible  in  our  bodies 
from  birth  till  death,  is  as  old  as  the  world.  It  is  not, 
as  many  people  suppose,  a  view  of  life  produced  by  the 
materialistic  science  and  philosophy  of  our  day  ;  our 
science  and  philosophy  have  only  carried  that  concep- 
tion to  its  furthest  limits,  making  more  obvious  than 
ever  the  incompatibility  of  that  view  of  life  with  the 
fundamental  demands  of  human  nature,  but  it  is  a  very 
old  and  primitive  view,  held  by  men  on  the  lowest 
level  of  development.  It  was  expressed  by  Chinese, 
by  Buddhists,  and  by  Jews,  and  in  the  Book  of  Job. 

This  view  is  now  expressed  as  follows :  Life  is  an 
accidental  play  of  the  forces  in  matter,  showing  itself 
in  time  and  space.  What  we  call  our  consciousness  is 
not  life,  but  is  a  delusion  of  the  senses,  which  makes  it 
seem  as  if  life  lay  in  that  consciousness.  Consciousness 
is  a  spark  which,  under  certain  conditions,  is  ignited  in 
matter,  burns  up  to  a  flame,  dies  down,  and  at  last  goes 
[  365  ] 


366  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

out  altogether.  This  flame  (i.e.,  consciousness)  atten- 
dant upon  matter  for  a  certain  time  between  two  infini- 
ties of  time,  is — nothing.  And  though  consciousness 
perceives  itself  and  the  whole  universe,  and  sits  in  judg- 
ment on  itself  and  on  the  universe,  and  sees  the  play  of 
chance  in  this  universe,  and,  above  all,  calls  it  a  play  of 
chance,  in  contradistinction  to  something  which  is  not 
chance — this  consciousness  itself  is  only  an  outcome  of 
lifeless  matter — a  phantom,  appearing  and  vanishing 
without  meaning  or  result.  Everything  is  the  outcome 
of  ever-changing  matter ;  and  what  we  call  life  is  but 
a  condition  of  dead  matter. 

That  is  one  view  of  life.  It  is  a  perfectly  logical 
view.  According  to  this  view,  man's  reasonable  con- 
sciousness is  but  an  accident  incidental  to  a  certain 
state  of  matter,  and,  therefore,  what  we  in  our  con- 
sciousness call  life,  is  but  a  phantom.  Only  dead 
matter  exists.     What  we  call  life,  is  the  play  of  death. 

The  other  view  of  life  is  this.  Life  is  only  what  I 
am  conscious  of  in  myself.  And  I  am  always  conscious 
of  my  life,  not  as  something  that  has  been  or  will  be 
(that  is  how  I  refect  on  my  life),  but  when  I  am  con- 
scious of  it,  I  feel  that — I  am — never  beginning  any- 
where, never  ending  anywhere.  With  the  conscious- 
ness of  my  life,  conceptions  of  time  and  space  do  not 
blend.  My  life  manifests  itself  in  time  and  space,  but 
that  is  only  its  manifestation.  Life  itself,  as  I  am  con- 
scious of  it,  is  something  I  perceive  apart  from  time 
and  space.  So  that,  in  this  view  of  life,  we  get  just 
the  contrary  result :  not  that  consciousness  of  life  is  a 
phantom,  but  that  everything  relating  to  time  and 
space  is  of  the  nature  of  a  phantom. 

Therefore,  in  this  view,  the  cessation  of  my  physical 
existence  in  time  and  space  has  no  reality,  and  cannot 
end,  or  even  hinder,  my  true  life.  And,  according  to 
this  view,  death  does  not  exist. 

Matter  is  the  Limit  of  Spirit. 

The  material  form  in  which  the  awakening  of  our 
consciousness  of  true  life  finds  us  in  this  world,  is,  so 


THOUGHTS  FROM  PRIVATE  LETTERS     367 

to  speak,  the  boundary  limiting  the  free  development 
of  our  spirit. 

Matter  is  the  limit  of  spirit.  But  true  life  is  the 
destruction  of  this  limitation. 

In  this  understanding  of  life  lies  the  very  essence  of 
the  understanding  of  truth — that  essence  which  gives 
man  the  consciousness  of  eternal  life. 

Materialists  mistake  that  which  limits  life,  for  life 
itself. 

The  Scaffolding. 

We  must  remind  ourselves  as  often  as  possible  that 
our  true  life  is  not  this  external,  material  life  that 
passes  before  our  eyes  here  on  earth,  but  that  it  is  the 
inner  life  of  our  spirit,  for  which  the  visible  life  serves 
only  as  a  scaffolding — a  necessary  aid  to  our  spiritual 
growth.  The  scaffolding  itself  is  only  of  temporary 
importance,  and,  after  it  has  served  its  purpose,  is  no 
longer  wanted,  but  even  becomes  a  hindrance. 

Seeing  before  him  an  enormously  high  and  elabo- 
rately constructed  scaffolding,  while  the  building  itself 
only  just  shows  above  its  foundations,  man  is  apt  to 
make  the  mistake  of  attaching  more  importance  to  the 
scaffolding  than  to  the  building  for  the  sake  of  which, 
alone,  this  temporary  scaffolding  has  been  put  up. 

We  must  remind  ourselves  and  one  another,  that  the 
scaffolding  has  no  meaning  or  importance,  except  to 
make  possible  the  erection  of  the  building  itself. 

The  Life  of  the  Spirit. 

There  are  moments  when  one  ceases  to  believe  in 
spiritual  life. 

This  is  not  unbelief,  but  rather  periods  of  belief  in 
physical  life. 

A  man  suddenly  begins  to  be  afraid  of  death.  This 
always  happens  when  something  has  befogged  him,  and 
he  once  more  begins  to  believe  that  bodily  life  is  real 
life,  just  as  in  a  theatre  you  may  forget  yourself,  and 
think   that  what    you    see   on   the   stage   is   actually 


368  ESSAYS  AND  LETTERS 

happening,  and  so  may  be  frightened  by  what  is 
done  there. 

That  is  what  happens  in  life. 

After  a  man  has  understood  that  his  life  is  not  on  the 
stage,  but  in  the  stalls — that  is,  not  in  his  personality, 
but  outside  it — it  sometimes  happens  that,  from  old 
habit,  he  suddenly  succumbs  again  to  the  seduction  of 
illusion,  and  feels  frightened. 

But  these  moments  of  illusion  are  not  enough  to  con- 
vince me  that  what  goes  on  before  me  (in  my  physical 
life)  is  really  happening. 

At  times  when  one's  spirit  sinks,  one  must  treat  one's 
self  as  one  treats  an  invalid — and  keep  quiet  ! 

The  Fear  of  Death. 

It  js  generally  supposed  that  there  is  something 
mystical  in  our  view  of  life  and  death.  But  there  is 
nothing  of  the  kind. 

I  like  my  garden,  I  like  reading  a  book,  I  like 
caressing  a  child.  By  dying  I  lose  all  this,  and 
therefore  I  do  not  wish  to  die,  and  I  fear  death. 

It  may  be  that  my  whole  life  consists  of  such  tempo- 
rary worldly  desires  and  their  gratification.  If  so,  1 
cannot  help  being  afraid  of  what  will  end  these  desires. 
But  if  these  desires  and  their  gratification  have  given 
way  and  been  replaced  in  me  by  another  desire — the 
desire  to  do  the  will  of  God,  to  give  myself  to  Him  in 
my  present  state,  and  in  any  possible  future  state — then 
the  more  my  desires  have  changed,  the  less  I  fear 
death,  and  the  less  does  death  exist  for  me.  And  if  my 
desires  be  completely  transformed,  then  nothing  but 
life  remains,  and  there  is  no  death.  To  replace  what 
is  earthly  and  temporary  by  what  is  eternal  is  the 
way  of  life,  and  along  it  we  must  travel.  But  in  what 
state  his  own  soul  is — each  one  knows  for  himself. 

The  Way  to  know  God  and  the  Soul. 

God  and  the  Soul  are  known  by  me  in  the  same  way 
that  I  know  infinity  :  not  by  means  of  definitions,  but 


THOUGHTS  FROM  PRIVATE  LETTERS     369 

in  quite  another  way.  Definitions  only  destroy  for  me 
that  knowledge.  Just  as  I  know  assuredly  that  there 
is  an  infinity  of  numbers,  so  do  I  know  that  there  is  a 
God,  and  that  I  have  a  soul.  For  me  this  knowledge 
is  indubitable,  simply  because  I  am  led  to  it  un- 
avoidably. 

To  the  certainty  of  the  infinity  of  numbers,  I  am  led 
by  addition. 

To  the  certain  knowledge  of  God  I  am  led  by  the 
question,  (  Whence  come  I  ?' 

To  the  knowledge  of  the  soul  I  am  led  by  the  ques- 
tion, '  What  am  I  ¥ 

And  I  know  surely  of  the  infinity  of  numbers,  and  of 
the  existence  of  God,  and  of  my  soul,  when  I  am  led 
to  the  knowledge  of  them  by  these  most  simple 
questions. 

To  one  I  add  one,  and  one  more,  and  another  one, 
and  another  one  ;  or  I  break  a  stick  in  two,  and  again 
in  two,  and  again,  and  again — and  I  cannot  help  know- 
ing that  number  is  infinite. 

I  was  born  of  my  mother,  and  she  of  my  grand- 
mother, and  she  of  my  great-grandmother,  but  the 
very  first — of  whom  ?     And  I  inevitably  arrive  at  God. 

My  legs  are  not  I,  my  arms  are  not  1,  my  head  is  not 
I,  my  feelings  are  not  I,  even  my  thoughts  are  not  I : 
then  what  am  I  ?     I  am  I,  I  am  my  soul. 

From  whatever  side  I  approach  God,  it  will  always  be 
the  same.  The  origin  of  my  thoughts,  my  reason,  is 
God.  The  origin  of  my  love,  is  also  He.  The  origin 
of  matter,  is  He  too. 

It  is  the  same  with  the  conception  of  the  soul.  If  I 
consider  my  striving  after  truth,  I  know  that  this 
striving  after  truth  is  my  immaterial  basis — my  soul. 
If  I  turn  to  my  feelings  of  love  for  goodness,  I  know 
that  it  is  my  soul  which  loves. 

These  *  Thoughts  '  are  taken  from  the  1903  Moscow  edition 
of  Tolstoy's  works,  and  (except  '  Two  Views, '  which  compare 
with  chapter  xvii.  of  '  On  Life ')  are  new  in  English. 


INDEX 


Absolution,  282 
Administrative  order,  202 
Alexander  II.,  195,  201,  203,  262 
Alexander  III.,  201,  203 
Ambrosius,  Bishop  of  Kharkof, 

284 
Anarchists,  264 
Aquinas^  Saint  Thomas,  59 
Augustine,  Saint,  135 

Ballou,  Adin,  177 
Bax,  E.  Belfort,  238 
Bayle,  Pierre,  293 
Beketof,  Professor,  149 
Belief,  Tolstoy's,  2S5,  286 
Berthelot,  P.  E.  M.,  289,  290 
Bondaref,  T.  M.,  1-15,  210  et  seq. 
Brahmanism,  138,  294,  296,  299 
Bread -labour,  5,  et  seq. 
Brull6f,  K.  P.,  28 
Buddhism,  134,  138,  143, 294,  296, 
299,  328 

Capital  punishment,  202,  273 
Carpenter,  Edward,  219  et  seq. 
Catherine  the  Great,  251 
Chastity,  41,  42,  314 
Christum  N on- Resistance,  177 
Christ's  Five  Commandments,  9 
Christ's  teaching,  43,  44,  50,  57, 

180,  235 
Christ's  use  of  scourge,  177 
Church  Christianity,  143,  296 
Church  doctrine,  279 
Church  sorceries,  2S0-282 
Civilization :  Its  Cause  and  Cure, 

219 
Coleridge,  8.  T.,  277,  287 
Comte,  Auguste,  130,  138,  224 
Consciousness,  365 
Constant,  B.,  do  Rebeque,  293 
Constantino  the  Great,  231 


Contagious  Diseases  Prevention 

Act,  36,  308 
Coppee,  Francois,  185 
Coronation  Fete,  204 
Corporal  punishment,  160,  166, 

273 
Critique  of  Prat.tical  Reason,  318 

Death,  the  fear  of,  368 
Decembrists,  160 
Desyatina,  213 
Didon,  Pere,  356 
Diet  and  Food,  90 
Doukhob6rs,  13(3,  235 
Dumas,  A.  (fils),  94-122 

Education,  273,  274 
Eiffel  Tower,  the,  34 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  303,  304 
Ethics  of  Diet,  the,  83,  92,  93 
Eucharist,  the,  282,  283,  302 
Evolution  and  Ethics,  149 

Faith,  130,  304-307,  352,  354 

Fasting,  77-82 

Feuerbach,  L.  A.,  293 

Feuillet,  Octave,  62,  63 

Flogging,  160-166 

Fors  Clavigera,  211 

Frederick  (German  Emperor),  257 

Garrison,  W.  Lloyd,  177 
George,  Henry,  218  et  seq. 
Goblet  d'Alviella,  294 
Godun6f,  Bdris,  251 
Gospels,  189  et  seq.,  300 
Government,  249  et  seq.,  333,  384 
Gradualists,  195 
Greek  religion,  the,  294,  296 

Hague  Conference,  the,  248 
Haig,  Dr.  A.,  90,  91 


370 


INDEX 


371 


Hartmann,  K.  R.  E.,  138 
Hebrew  beliefs,  106,  294 
Hegel,  G.  W.  F.,  138,  319 
Herron,  G.  D.,  177,  178 
Herzen,  A.,  66,  67 
Higginson,  T.  W.,  178 
Humbert,  261 
Hume,  D.,  320,  324 
Huxley,  Professor,  149,  151 

Ic6ns,  204,  206,  233,  234,  303 
Ideals,  118 

Jewish  morality,  144,  294 
Jingoism,  238 

John,  Father,  of  Cronstadt,  345 
1  Judges  of  the  Peace,'  198,  202 
Julien,  Stanislaus,  103 
Jurisprudence,  317 

Kant,  I.,  33,  147,  319 

Labour,  the   duty   of  physical, 

211,  212 
Lamaism,  299 
Lao  Tsze,  103 
Leo  XIII. ,  Pope,  59 
Lessing,  G.  E.,  31 
Life,  the  meaning  of,  179 

,,     two  views  of,  365 
Livermore,  Mrs.,  178 

Manet,  Edouard,  96 

Marriage,  44-47- 

Marty n,  Carlos,  178 

Marx,  Karl,  225 

Maupassant,  Guy  de,  62 

Medical  science,  319 

Modern  Science  :  A  Criticism,  219 

Mohammedanism,  134,  143,  296 

Moliere,  295 

Molokans,  235,  275 

Morality,  definition  of,  142,  154 

Mo  Ti,  333 

Mouravyof,  S.  L,  160,  161 

Mouravybf,  M.  I.,  161 

Muller,  Max,  130 

Nazarenes,  Austrian,  235 

,,  Servian,  136 

Newton,  Heber,  177,  178 
„        Sir  Isaac,  4,  131 
Nicene  Creed,  the,  303,  341 
Nicholas  II.,  204,  266 


Nietzsche,   F.  W.,   147,   319-321, 

354 
Non-Resistance,  177  et  seq. 

Of  the  Way  of  Virtue,  103 
Ogaryof,  N.  P.,  66,  67 
Old  Believers,  275 
Otrepyef,  Gregory,  251 

Paradise,  the  story  of,  3 
Patriotism,  238  et  seg. 
Paulicians,  296 
Paul,  Saint,  300 
Philosophy,  146-148,  319 
Plato,  55,  56,  137 
Political  economy,  225,  316 
Pougatchef,  195,  196,  251 
Priesthood,  300 
Printing,  168  et  seq. 
Progress  and  Poverty,  215 
Protestantism,  351 

Quakers,  136 

Radistchef,  A.  N.,  195 
Rask61nikof,  28,  29 
Razin,  Stenka,  195 
Redemption,  the,  349 
Religion,  principles  of,  32S 

,,        definition  of,   154,   293- 
294,  306,  336,  337 
Renaissance,  138,  141 
Repentance,  117,  126 
Resurrection,  282 
Reville,  A.,  294 
Robespierre,  M.  M.  I.,  130 
Roman  Empire,  310 
Rouble,  213 
Rousseau,  J.  J.,  319 
Ruskin,  John,  211,  309 

Sabbatarians,  1 
Sacraments,  the,  281,  282 
Saints'  days,  5 
Salvation  Army,  the,  344 
Schopenhauer,  A.,  137,  138,  140, 

147,  319 
Science,  95  et  seq.,  104,  105,  142, 

219  et  seq.,  289,  290 
Schleiermacher,  F.  E.  D.,  293 
Scripture  History,  346 
Self-control,  60,  61,  76,  77 
Semenof  Regiment,  160 
Serfs,  emancipation  of,  21S 
Sevastopol,  21 
Skobelef,  M.,  21 

AA   2 


372 


INDEX 


Single-Tax,  the,  213  et  seq. 

Slaughter-house,  a,  85-90 

Smoking,  23-27,  33 

Socialism,  Encyclical  on,  59 

Sociology,  316 

Social  Problems,  215 

Soul,  Life  of  the,  367 

South  African  War,  the,  239,  248, 

249 
Spinoza,  B.,  147,  319 
Spirit,  367 
Spiritualism,  134 
'  State  of  Siege,'  202,  205 
Stundists,  275 
Super-men  (Uebermensch),  148, 

321 

Talmud,  the,  139 
Tao,  the,  103 
Taoism,  134,  136,  144,  299 
Tatian.  2 
Technology,  318 
Terrorists,  the,  195 
Theodosius,  Saint,  205 
Tolstoy,  Count  Sergius,  219 
Tourgenef,  L,  320 


Trinity,  the,  281,  302 
Trollope,  A.,  62 
Tsebrikof,  Madame,  202 

Unitarians,  136 
Universalists,  136 
Uric  Acid  as  a  Factor  in  the  Valua- 
tion of  Disease,  91 

Vauvenargues,  Luc  de  C,  293 
Verigin,  Peter,  167  et  seq. 
Vie  de  Jesus-Christ,  356 
Voltaire,  F.  M.  A.,  130,  302,  324 

War,  239,  248,  249,  254 

Wilhelm  II.,    Kaiser,    245,    266, 

322 
Williams,  Howard,  93 
Work,  103  et  seq. 

,,      Dumas  (fils)  on,  111,  112 

,,      Zola  on,  101 

Zemsky  Natchalniks,    198,   205, 

272 
Zola,  Emile,  94-122 


BILLING  AND  SON8,    LTD.,    PRINTERS,    QUILDFORD. 


RETURN     CIRCULATION  DEPAF 
TO— »      202  Main  Library 


LOAN  PERIOD  1 
HOME  USE 


ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

1 -month  loans  may  be  renewed  by  calling  642-3405 

1-year  loans  may  be  recharged  by  tringin;;  the  b^r';-  to  the 

Renewals  and  recharges  may  be  made  4  days  prior  to  due  d 

DUE  AS  STAMPED  BE 


OCT  1 7  1984 

RECEIVED  BY 


OCT  17  1984 


CIRCULATION  DEFT 


Qb^iSlhD:) 


saiuvuan  i 


A313>IH39  0  n 


(  # 


1 40 1 72 

THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


